As day after day of the Legislative session went by with the state’s lawmakers doing nothing about the budget crisis, Louisiana political commentators grew increasingly angry. Why, they asked, aren’t these people — our leaders — doing anything?
They took particular aim at the fiscal conservatives — the legislators who’ve been saying for years that the budget of Louisiana’s government is bloated and should be cut. We’ve reached the point that commentators across the political spectrum are letting it be known that they’re ready for all those cuts. They’re weary of leaders who’ve trumpeted the need for cuts for years. They figure if there’s ever going to be a time for cutting, this is it.
So where are the cuts? Why don’t legislators — even legislators who call themselves fiscal conservatives — cut government spending?
One theory is that a politician who cuts government spending is essentially cutting government subsidies for the organizations and businesses that have contributed to his campaigns. If they lose their government gravy, these organizations and businesses may not contribute the next time the politician runs for office.
I think there might be something to the theory.
‘I Have No Inclination Of Anything’
In an April 7 story, The Advocate reported on a particular instance of fiscal conservatives (and others) passing up a golden opportunity to cut government spending. In committee hearings, the Legislature declined to propose a cut of even one penny in the $98 million budget for its own agencies.
The legislative budget was $86 million in 2008. Now, eight years later, it’s $98 million. During all the years that budget was going up $12 million, the Louisiana Legislature was dominated by fiscal conservatives.
Sen. Karen Carter Peterson, a Democrat, pointed out that the Legislature employs workers at a salary of more than $100,000 a year and then allows them to earn up to 250 hours of overtime pay in addition to the immense salary. State Senate President John Alario, a Republican, responded, “I have no inclination of anything that’s not proper there.”
Now there’s a zippy rebuttal for ya. Why don’t politicians ever say, “no comment”? Is the reason they fear that if they say, “no comment,” we might think they were doing something that was … well … “not proper”? But what could they ever possibly be doing that was not proper? Evading the issue? What’s not proper about that? Can it really be not proper if everybody does it?
Hey Homeboy, It’s Been At The Point
An April 2 editorial in Alexandria’s Town Talk began with these astonishing sentences:
“It’s getting to the point we dread reading when a new national poll gets released. If the poll ranks the states, odds are Louisiana will be on the wrong end of the standings.”
“It’s getting to the point …” Is somebody in The Town Talk editorial bureau high? I’ve been here more than 15 years, and every one of those years Louisiana has been “on the wrong end of the standings.”
And it’s not a matter of “dreading” reading about the standings. I don’t dread reading about the standings because I know from experience that Louisiana is going to be at the bottom. Fact of business, I’m disappointed on the rare occasions when we aren’t at the bottom. I always feel a little irked when Mississippi or West Virginia edges us out for the bottom spot.
The latest last-place finish that The Town Talk was pretending was big news was a finding by the U.S. Census Bureau that “Louisiana is behind every state and the District of Columbia in gender wage disparity.” The census bureau found that in Louisiana, women earn 65 cents for every dollar that men earn.
Here’s hoping that no intrepid correspondent at The Town Talk looks up Louisiana’s ranking in the hundred other measures of gender disparity.
The Political Funny
We’re unlikely to find a more humorous funny than the one Jeremy Alford wrote in his new “Tuesday Tracker” column on April 5:
“But I think we all know that the Senate bill taking center stage this week will be SB 166 by Sen. Conrad Appel. It allows for the burial of pet remains alongside human remains. That one has a lot of bark.”
The new “Tuesday Tracker” provides a complete picture of Louisiana politics once a week. I do mean “complete.” The report ranges from serious legislative debates to birthdays, anniversaries and other such stuff. If you’re afraid of TMI, you can enjoy Alford’s more precise “Political Notebook,” which runs in every issue of this magazine.
Journalism Is Over
Throughout my life, the Associated Press has been the last word in journalistic integrity. No matter how discouraged you got about other trends in journalism, you could always turn to, and count on, the AP for the golden standard in journalism — a standard that was never violated.
Well, would you believe the AP is now running ads as news stories? Read on and be amazed.
I was scrolling through my Twitter feed on April 6 when I saw an AP post for something called The Body Studio — a business. The photo of the three models posing for The Body Studio looked a little odd for an AP story. But, of course, the AP covers lots of stuff.
Then I noticed the text under the photo. It began with the word “Ad” followed by a colon. Then came the headline “Selfridges London Launches The Body Studio.”
At least the AP had the courtesy to tell people right up front the thing was an advertisement. When I clicked the link, I saw that a preliminary paragraph of the “story” read like this: “Produced for Selfridges by AP Content Services, the paid content service of The Associated Press. The AP news staff was not involved in its creation.”
“The paid content service of The Associated Press.” Again, no one could accuse the AP of trying to get one over on its readers. The language was clanky, but the message was clear. This wasn’t a news story. This was a paid advertisement. An ad. Run by the AP. Just as if it were a news story.
What does all this mean? Here’s what I think. No one in the U.S. wants to read news for the sake of reading news anymore. I don’t mean there isn’t a single person in the country who’s big on reading news. I mean that there’s next-to-no one under the age of 30 or 35 who’s reading news just for the sake of getting news. The AP’s move makes it clear: from now on, if a medium wants to report any news at all, it will, most likely, also have to present advertising as if advertising were news. These fake stories will, for the time being, anyway, subsidize the news stories that people no longer want to read but publishers, editors and journalists still feel dedicated to.
One day, not too far in the future, novelists will write about journalists — people who lived in the past and wrote about events that went on to become part of history. Of course, that’s assuming that there will continue to be novels and novelists.
And The Payoff
About 15 minutes after I finished writing the above section, I noticed that Twitter had placed Selfridges first in my “Who to follow” section. (Let me put you out of your suspense. I did not follow Selfridges.)
Insert Name Vs. Insert Name
I see in the news that one of the big movie releases recently was called Batman v Superman. Now, I don’t watch movies about comic book characters. But the title to this one did get me thinking. Why would Batman want to fight Superman? Aren’t they both single-mindedly devoted to getting bad guys? Don’t they both want the same thing? So what are they fighting about?
I know Batman can be kind of moody. Could he have developed a grudge of some sort against Superman? Maybe. But even if he did, wouldn’t he stop to consider that Superman is a superhero with super-powers? Batman may be the biggest badass in Gotham City. But superman can throw a freight train over Lake Michigan while spinning a plate on the pinky finger of his free hand. Who would take on that sort of opponent?
I had hardly formulated these questions in the treasury of my imagination when I read that some big studio was bringing out a new movie titled Captain America Vs. Iron Man.
You don’t have to have your finger on the pulse of Hollywood to figure out what’s going on here. Hollywood has run out of superheroes to make movies about, so producers are now making movies about superheroes dueling other superheroes.
You can foresee the problem that will one day arise. If Hollywood can run out of superheroes, it can also run out of duels between superheroes.
I’m going to do my part to keep this from happening. Hollywood producers: feel free to use the following superhero duels for the subjects of your movies:
— Thor vs. Rocket Raccoon
— The Hulk vs. Wonder Dog
— Flash vs. Howard The Duck
— Spawn vs. Hong Kong Phooey
— Wonder Woman vs. Mighty Mouse
— Wolverine vs. Klondike Kat
— Spider-man vs. Astroboy.
Hollywood may burn through those titles pretty fast. Not to worry. I can think of arbitrary superhero feud titles out of the blue. Here’s one you’ll love:
Spider-Man Versus The Human Torch Except On Days That Have “R” In Them, When It’s The Human Torch Vs. The Thing Or On The Second Tuesday Of The Month, When It’s The Thing Vs. Spider-man On Odd-Numbered Dates And Spider-Man Vs. Green Lantern On Even-Numbered Dates. (The title makes sense. Read it again. Keep in mind that The Human Torch has to do laundry on the second Tuesday of every month.)
Producers: call me if you need more concepts.
The Funnies
Woman: Do you have a nonfiction section?
Book guy: Well, everything that’s not fiction is nonfiction. Over there’s cooking. Over there’s history.
Woman: No, that’s not what I asked. Do you have a section for nonfiction?
Book guy: Well, there are no nonfiction novels. Everything that’s not a novel is nonfiction.
Woman: But you don’t have a nonfiction section?
Book guy: No. Everything that isn’t fiction is nonfiction.
— Overheard in a Barnes & Noble in Staten Island; from the book Overheard in New York by S. Morgan Friedman.
Waiter No. 1: Sit anywhere you’d like.
Guy: Thanks.
Waiter No. 2 diverts him to a small table in an occupied section.
Guy: So by “anywhere you’d like,” you guys meant this exact table.
Waiter No. 2: Thank you.
— Overheard in Clark’s Restaurant in Brooklyn Heights.
Comments are closed.