From What's Up, Doc?
There’s a lot of confusion and disorder in Montana politics right now.
The way I see it, there are a few issues that are stirring this tumult up.
Let’s discuss these issues and some possible ways to solve them.
The way I see it, there are a few issues that are stirring this tumult up.
- First, we have the Angela McLean departure and the speculation on who will replace her.
- Next, we have the continual bad stream of news from UM to deal with. How long that shitty mess can stay off shiny shoes in Helena is yet to be seen.
- After that, our fourth branch of government continues to disintegrate. Yes, I’m talking about the Montana media.
- Finally, there’s nothing to run on in 2016.
Let’s discuss these issues and some possible ways to solve them.
Lt. Gov
I don’t want to get much into the Angela Mclean story because there’s not much to get into.
In terms of her replacement, that decision will be made behind closed doors.
Hey, I’m not confident about it at all.
I feel we have a small group of people that make all the decisions, that’s all.
Personally, I’d like to see more people involved in the decision-making process.
Now, I will add that I’ve heard Bullock will be polling to find out a suitable replacement.
What the hell does that mean?
I guess it means a select-few, those closest to him, will be asked what they think.
That sucks.
Mostly I’m expecting someone that will be able to help Bullock raise lots of money for his 2016 gubernatorial bid.
And is that such a bad thing? Most people that can raise money are able administrators.
I guess what bothers me is that so many are able for the kind of people I don’t like – rich Wall Street-types that walk all over the poor man.
Damn it – Democrats are supposed to fight against that, not be a part of it!
When I see people raising money all the time, pandering to the bankers that got us into the financial crisis, then I have to shake my head.
Who the hell are we?
We need to stop raising so much money, put those bankers in jail, and start asking people what their problems are and how we can solve them.
Instead, though, it’s raising money all the time.
It makes you sick, it really does.
Now, perhaps I’m not the most knowledgeable on these things.
Perhaps this situation I describe is not what exists in Montana at all. Maybe I’m putting some of my disdain of National Democrats onto those in Montana.
Something tells me that I’m not far off, however.
In terms of her replacement, that decision will be made behind closed doors.
Hey, I’m not confident about it at all.
I feel we have a small group of people that make all the decisions, that’s all.
Personally, I’d like to see more people involved in the decision-making process.
Now, I will add that I’ve heard Bullock will be polling to find out a suitable replacement.
What the hell does that mean?
I guess it means a select-few, those closest to him, will be asked what they think.
That sucks.
Mostly I’m expecting someone that will be able to help Bullock raise lots of money for his 2016 gubernatorial bid.
And is that such a bad thing? Most people that can raise money are able administrators.
I guess what bothers me is that so many are able for the kind of people I don’t like – rich Wall Street-types that walk all over the poor man.
Damn it – Democrats are supposed to fight against that, not be a part of it!
When I see people raising money all the time, pandering to the bankers that got us into the financial crisis, then I have to shake my head.
Who the hell are we?
We need to stop raising so much money, put those bankers in jail, and start asking people what their problems are and how we can solve them.
Instead, though, it’s raising money all the time.
It makes you sick, it really does.
Now, perhaps I’m not the most knowledgeable on these things.
- First, in the early-2000s I was in college and didn’t pay much attention to political goings-on.
- Then, I was out of Montana from 2008 to 2013. Hell, I left before Schweitzer got elected to his second term. And when you’re living outside the US you just don’t focus that much on US news, and certainly not Montana news.
- Finally, maybe there isn’t some widespread Wall-Street buying of politicians in the guise of campaign donations going on and I’m just confused.
Perhaps this situation I describe is not what exists in Montana at all. Maybe I’m putting some of my disdain of National Democrats onto those in Montana.
Something tells me that I’m not far off, however.
UM Troubles All…the…Time
Is UM ever going to get better? I was reading the comments on the Missoulian article today, the one telling us of the upcoming budget cuts.
God, why do we put up with this bloated UM administration?
I don’t see how they benefit me or countless other Montana families.
That administration is benefiting someone, however. I bet it’s rich people, like those getting those $100,000+ salaries.
I’m sorry, is that not a lot of money at a top school?
Wake up – UM is not a top school and hasn’t been for some time! It is a state liberal arts school that has a terrible problem with rape, alcohol, and student debt, however.
But we don’t want to talk about that.
Fuck that – let’s talk about it!
et’s camp out on the Oval and talk about it all night and use loudspeakers to talk about it the next day.
Oh, we couldn’t do that, however. Jobs might be lost!
I’ll close by saying that the problems at UM disturb me greatly. I’ve written about them in detail many times.
But so what?
I’m not a student, I don’t work at UM, and I have no student loans.
Why the hell should I care?
That’s the attitude most of Montana has and that’s why the problems persist.
It's also a good excuse for UM faculty members and staff to use, hoping someone else will do the dirty work for them.
Good luck with that.
God, why do we put up with this bloated UM administration?
I don’t see how they benefit me or countless other Montana families.
That administration is benefiting someone, however. I bet it’s rich people, like those getting those $100,000+ salaries.
I’m sorry, is that not a lot of money at a top school?
Wake up – UM is not a top school and hasn’t been for some time! It is a state liberal arts school that has a terrible problem with rape, alcohol, and student debt, however.
But we don’t want to talk about that.
Fuck that – let’s talk about it!
et’s camp out on the Oval and talk about it all night and use loudspeakers to talk about it the next day.
Oh, we couldn’t do that, however. Jobs might be lost!
I’ll close by saying that the problems at UM disturb me greatly. I’ve written about them in detail many times.
But so what?
I’m not a student, I don’t work at UM, and I have no student loans.
Why the hell should I care?
That’s the attitude most of Montana has and that’s why the problems persist.
It's also a good excuse for UM faculty members and staff to use, hoping someone else will do the dirty work for them.
Good luck with that.
The Decaying Montana Press
In terms of the media, what I’m getting at is the departure today of long-time Missoulian editor Sherry Devlin.
I checked out the Missoulian article on it and it says she’s worked there since 1979.
Damn, that’s a long time.
Think about the institutional memory there, and the value that brings to an organization.
I mean, here’s someone with nearly 40 years of perspective on people, places, and problems in Montana.
Besides that, she has tons of connections and perspective and historical knowledge that can lend itself to well-crafted, head-nodding stories.
I might as well be speaking about Chuck Johnson or Mike Dennison, or some of the other quality Montana reporters that are no longer with us.
We’ve had a lot of shake-ups with the fourth branch of government over the past year or so.
It hurts.
This is where stories come from. More and more, however, large corporate boards – like that of Lee Enterprises – view cost-cutting measures as more important than reporting.
That’s why we get young editors brought in, like we saw at the Missoulian, and I’m not sure that helps us.
There was a lot of talk about the chem-trail editorial recently, and I guess that’s one aspect of this problem that I’m getting at.
Mainly, though, we’re ditching talented reporters and then not replacing them. When we do replace them it’s usually with some out-of-state cub reporter that’s just passing through.
They’re thinking more about the next market than long-term consequences. They don’t have the memory of state issues to give us an accurate story, either.
So it’s frustrating. Will this problem end? I don’t think so.
The world is changing. Just the other day it was reported that online shopping was higher than in-store shopping for Black Friday.
Maybe it’ll take 10 years, but stores will close. Distribution centers will get larger. Lives will change.
If we make it that far. The world is not in a good place right now, and we’re sending more troops into Iraq.
Perhaps people like Devlin are glad to be done with all of that nonsense. I can’t blame ‘em.
I checked out the Missoulian article on it and it says she’s worked there since 1979.
Damn, that’s a long time.
Think about the institutional memory there, and the value that brings to an organization.
I mean, here’s someone with nearly 40 years of perspective on people, places, and problems in Montana.
Besides that, she has tons of connections and perspective and historical knowledge that can lend itself to well-crafted, head-nodding stories.
I might as well be speaking about Chuck Johnson or Mike Dennison, or some of the other quality Montana reporters that are no longer with us.
We’ve had a lot of shake-ups with the fourth branch of government over the past year or so.
It hurts.
This is where stories come from. More and more, however, large corporate boards – like that of Lee Enterprises – view cost-cutting measures as more important than reporting.
That’s why we get young editors brought in, like we saw at the Missoulian, and I’m not sure that helps us.
There was a lot of talk about the chem-trail editorial recently, and I guess that’s one aspect of this problem that I’m getting at.
Mainly, though, we’re ditching talented reporters and then not replacing them. When we do replace them it’s usually with some out-of-state cub reporter that’s just passing through.
They’re thinking more about the next market than long-term consequences. They don’t have the memory of state issues to give us an accurate story, either.
So it’s frustrating. Will this problem end? I don’t think so.
The world is changing. Just the other day it was reported that online shopping was higher than in-store shopping for Black Friday.
Maybe it’ll take 10 years, but stores will close. Distribution centers will get larger. Lives will change.
If we make it that far. The world is not in a good place right now, and we’re sending more troops into Iraq.
Perhaps people like Devlin are glad to be done with all of that nonsense. I can’t blame ‘em.
What are the Issues?
What the hell am I supposed to run on in 2016 when I decide to run for the legislature again?
Beats me.
There are no major party issues, that I can see.
I’ve talked about this problem before, blamed it on the National Democrats. It’s a presidential election year and since we have a primary the top candidates will say whatever the hell they need to say.
How does that help me?
I suppose the Montana Democrats won’t come up with platform issues until next summer, a few months before the general election.
Is it any wonder they can’t take the state?
My God, the level of disorganization with this group is appalling.
Election 2016 started in November 2014 you dolts – wake up!
Candidates need issues, especially legislative candidates. I’d like to run on some infrastructure things myself, but what are they?
I will credit some of the newspapers with profiling infrastructure a bit this week, before the tumult broke out, but so what?
It seems there is no plan and right now Bullock is trying to fund as much of the failed 2015 infrastructure bill with discretionary spending.
That’s of course when he can be bothered to be in the state at all.
Jesus, someone tell that man to get in his desk and get to work. If he needs to hit the road, stop raising money out of state and start going to small communities to listen to problems.
But Bullock’s a Wall Street Democrat and raising money’s in his blood.
One consequence of this is that the 2017 Legislature will go to Republicans. Bullock will spend yet another session in defense-mode because of it.
Who does that benefit?
Beats me.
There are no major party issues, that I can see.
I’ve talked about this problem before, blamed it on the National Democrats. It’s a presidential election year and since we have a primary the top candidates will say whatever the hell they need to say.
How does that help me?
I suppose the Montana Democrats won’t come up with platform issues until next summer, a few months before the general election.
Is it any wonder they can’t take the state?
My God, the level of disorganization with this group is appalling.
Election 2016 started in November 2014 you dolts – wake up!
Candidates need issues, especially legislative candidates. I’d like to run on some infrastructure things myself, but what are they?
I will credit some of the newspapers with profiling infrastructure a bit this week, before the tumult broke out, but so what?
It seems there is no plan and right now Bullock is trying to fund as much of the failed 2015 infrastructure bill with discretionary spending.
That’s of course when he can be bothered to be in the state at all.
Jesus, someone tell that man to get in his desk and get to work. If he needs to hit the road, stop raising money out of state and start going to small communities to listen to problems.
But Bullock’s a Wall Street Democrat and raising money’s in his blood.
One consequence of this is that the 2017 Legislature will go to Republicans. Bullock will spend yet another session in defense-mode because of it.
Who does that benefit?
