Richard D. McLellan Declares: AG Office Equal to Rick Sndyer Govenor Elect's Office

by: Hector Solon

Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 13:03:57 PM EST

Well-within AG's role

In response to your Nov. 4 editorial, "Snyder needs to keep big GOP majority on target":

When did the Free Press decide that Michigan's newly elected attorney general will not hold a policy-making office in this state? In pushing his tough-on-crime agenda, Attorney General-elect Bill Schuette is acting in the tradition of all his predecessors of the past 50 years.

The state attorney general is a constitutionally elected officer and possesses all the inherent powers of an attorney general. As the Official Record of Michigan Constitutional Convention stated: "The activities of the attorney general's office range over the entire breadth of state government. His scope of interest is as great as that of the governor."

Prisons, public safety, taxes and many other issues are important to the citizens of Michigan, and they need a strong attorney general to weigh in.

Richard D. McLellan
A member of Bill Schuette's transition team, Lansing

[Emphasis Added]

More background below...

What if you threw a campaign and no one came?

by: LiberalLucy

Sun Feb 28, 2010 at 17:52:13 PM EST

As we heard on Friday, House Speaker Andy Dillon told the world that he would be announcing his official run for governor today on Sunday with a state-wide tour with several stops around the state, including Saginaw. 

Just a couple hours ago, MLive ran with a story that 'technical difficulties' prevented Mr. Dillon from holding his appearance in Saginaw. What technology?? Unless he had a laser show planned, technology never has a place in a campaign stop.

Not only that, but rumors from folks on the ground in the area are pretty conclusive that the only thing lacking was the actual supporters to provide the camera-ready backdrop for the media despite multiple attempts to shore up support by senior staff. 

Even more interesting is who did meet with Dillon on an earlier date.

According to sources, Dillon met with an 'unknown entity' in Midland on Feb. 15th, the same day he was trying to meet with local Democratic party officials in Saginaw. 

Given Dillon's conservative politics of the last 5 years, the odds are pretty good that he was having a close door meeting with the extreme-right minds of the Mackinac Center.

While it's pure speculation at this point, it's not too much of a stretch, particularly when you consider the politics of both parties, as well the lack of berating by the Center of Dillon as of late. Say what you will, but given Mackinac's love of beating up Democrats, they've been awfully quiet when it comes to the Speaker. 

At the end of the day, the Mackinac Center maybe the best Dillon can get. After a long reign of vehemently anti-labor, anti-environmental, anti-stem cell, anti-everything progressive, Dillon is the Democratic proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing at best.

Perhaps the only 'technical difficulities' Dillon's campaign had in Saginaw was getting the Right folks out. 

UPDATE: Pete's Pilgrimage - A Return to More of the Same from the Mackinac Center's Man

by: Hector Solon

Wed May 13, 2009 at 17:44:28 PM EDT

UPDATE: Hoekstra's Tuesday "Interview" of David Littmann on the Auto Crisis at the Mackinac Center during his day as policy pupil there now posted.

And ye shall know him by the money he keeps

by: Eric B.

Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:00:00 PM EDT

What do the Heartland Insitute and the John Locke Foundation have in common?

Tobacco money. Also money from the energy-related Koch Foundation, the founder of which helped to also fund the Cato Institute, which itself takes money from Altria (Ex-Phillip Morris, which gave money to Tim Walberg, who himself received $2,100 from uber rightwing money dude Richard Mellon Scaife in 2006), big oil, tobacco and Wal-Mart .  Also, Cato Institute funder the JM Foundation, which also gives money to the American Enterprise Institute (which itself relies heavily on oil company money, and also shares Scaife money with the Heartland Institute).

There is something else that has the Heartland Institute and John Locke Foundation tangled up besides rightwing think tank money ... Climate Studies Watch, the director for which published an Op-Ed piece in this morning's Detroit News.

The Politics of Potholes (and Crackpots)

by: LiberalLucy

Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 10:45:00 AM EST

This time of year, there's one thing that really scares me - driving.

It's not the snow, the sleet, the ice, the deer/turkey/wildlife that always seem to aim for my car, or even my fellow drivers who seem to lose all of their driving skills as soon as the weather drops below 40 degrees. It's all those blasted potholes. This year it's gotten even worse. With all the heavy weather, road commissions are running out of salt and picking and choosing which roads get treated.

I think about the cost of alignments, new tires, struts and shocks, and the ever expensive axle rods and I feel a financial panic attack coming on. There's no such thing as a cheap auto repair, it's just the nature of the business.

Media outlets always seem to budget time and staff towards covering the craters in the road, and some even sponsor "find the biggest pothole contests'. It's a smart tactic actually, slow news day, go for the potholes. They always unite people in their anger and frustration and it's the classic us v. them example. We all fall for it, because, well, who really likes potholes? 

People blame the weather, blame the law of physics, blame the government for under-funding MDOT and all of the above. To a certain extent, it's all true.

Supply-Side Hysteria: Michigan Edition

by: Nazgul35

Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 15:18:55 PM EDT

One of the architects of supply-side economics, Bruce Bartlett has an article in the New York Times discussing what he thinks of the current crop of idiots running around in Republican clothing calling for the destruction of our state and nation's economy....errr...I mean, fiscal responsibility.

AS one who was present at the creation of "supply-side economics" back in the 1970s, I think it is long past time that the phrase be put to rest. It did its job, creating a new consensus among economists on how to look at the national economy. But today it has become a frequently misleading and meaningless buzzword that gets in the way of good economic policy.

Uh oh...Mike Bishop might want to skip the rest of this...but if you have the intestinal fortitude (or any in Mike's case), read on after the jump.