The Winner of the First Annual 75th Street Brewery Homebrewing Contest is . . .

Me.

There were 17 beers in the competition - most of them were really, really good. I particularly enjoyed an Orange Honey Wheat, which I think the Brewery ought to consider adding to its summer line-up, a Scottish Wee Heavy, a wonderful Schwarzbier, a great Saison and a pretty darned good Weissbier.

Everyone in the bar got to judge all the beers, and vote for only one favorite. The samples were served in 3 flights, apparently divided by strength. The first flight was lighter bodied, but it was probably the best flight in terms of serving up a bunch of very good, drinkable beers. As the intensity of the flights increased, so did the margin between the great beers and the ones that, in the words of one of the volunteer judges, tasted "more like an attempt on my life".

All but a couple of the beers, though, were excellent. Judges got to taste a whole lot of styles of beer, which is unusual for a homebrew contest, where you normally taste flights composed entirely of one type of beer. Some of the judges seemed to really take the process seriously, carefully sniffing and swirling and holding samples up to the light, while others knocked back the beers and chose the one they enjoyed the most.

I talked to the staff during the contest, and it sounds like, next year, they may change the way they do things. They talked about having the 75th Street brewers and staff taste all the submissions, and decide on a panel of 5 or so finalists for everyone to taste and vote on. That sounds like a good idea to me - they would get more submissions if every brewer did not need to submit a half case of beer just to get into the game. That way, we could just submit a couple or three bottles to start, and then submit the rest if we made it into the finals. Also, a group of 5 or so brewers would get the honor of being named finalists, instead of just one brewer getting all the honors. Finally, perhaps those of us who keg could simply bring up a keg of the finalist beer, rather than hassling with bottles and bottling equipment.

I'm not sure when, but sometime in the relatively near future, you'll be able to buy a pint of my beer at my favorite brewery in Kansas City. Cheers!

Gustav, Please Don't Hit NOLA

I know it's a form of catastrophic NIMBY-hood, but I hope and pray that Hurricane Gustav lands anywhere but New Orleans, and that the good people of the Big Easy get to continue rebuilding their lives and bringing joy to the world. Even when I'm miles away from Domilise's, I'm somehow enriched by the fact that it exists.

EXCLUSIVE - MCCAIN WILL PICK PALIN FOR VEEP!

I had this story all written up last week, but forgot to hit "Publish Post". Sorry. I plumb forgot.

If you don't believe me, you probably think Andi Udris is lying, too.

Free Beer Tomorrow!!

I talked to the people at 75th Street Brewery a little while ago, and they say the homebrew contest will run from 12:00 until 4:00 tomorrow, and they'll announce the winner at 6. Better yet, they say they won't be charging people to "judge", so that means free beer.

Come on out and taste the beers brewed by local amateurs - I'm sure there'll be some tasty, creative, and impressive beers. If you happen to like the German Wheat or the Honey Beer, so much the better, but even if you don't - come out and see what the homebrewers have come up with.

The winner wins the honor of having the 75th Street Brewery brew up an entire batch of his or her recipe, and then having it sold on tap. In other words, 75th Street gets a new recipe of a beer that it already knows its customers like, without having to pay for Research and Development. Sounds like a win/win to me.

Irresponsibility, Cordish, Convention Hotels, and Game Boy Games

A few days ago, I was going to write a piece about the chutzpah of the Cordish Company for trying to prevent light rail from proceeding on most logical route to downtown. Before I got around to writing my thoughts, though, I saw that Mark Forsythe had already written a piece that caught the spirit of what I was thinking, and did it more gracefully and subtly than I could have. One sentence in particular stands out as an effective, thought-provoking analysis of the real game being played here - "Isn't the real issue the kind of people Cordish fears that public transit will bring to the district?" Go read the whole thing.

To broaden Mark's points a little, though, this little flap is typical of the kind of power plays being played by Kansas City's monied interests. Cordish and the Sprint Center CHOSE to put their project right on Grand, and talked us out of millions and millions of tax dollars to do it. We put our faith in their ability to deliver a solid business plan - after all, they're smart, professional business people, right? Everybody who knew anything about Kansas City knew that we were looking at developing light rail down Grand. If they were truly foolish enough to create a business plan that hinges on Kansas City shunning light rail, well, cry me a river. We might as well shut down the Power and White District now, because the people running it must be fools.

In another example of taxpayers being looked at to bail out bad business decisions, a lot of people are now claiming that we need to divert tax dollars from our schools and streets and police officers so that we can build a big, fancy convention hotel. What?!?! When they built the convention center, did they or did they not anticipate this "need"? If they did, then they should have included it in their plans in the first place, and budgeted for it. If they didn't, and it really is necessary, well, too bad, so sad. You screwed up, and I don't want to give you any more money after you've demonstrated you won't spend it wisely. What will you "need" next?

When my son was very young, he wanted to buy a Gameboy. He saved his nickels and dimes, and did extra chores, until he had the money. I asked him about how much games would cost him, and he had prepared a list of games he wanted to buy and how much they cost. He had planned out how he would continue to save for each game, and how long he expected it to take. The kid had a business plan, and it didn't hinge on his old man stepping in and bailing him out.

Is it too much to ask our development community to show the same level of responsibility?

Homebrew Contest on Saturday - Make me a Winner!

On Saturday afternoon, from 3 until 5, the 75th Street Brewery is conducting a homebrew contest. I've submitted a German Wheat beer and a Belgian Honey Tripel. For the beer geeks out there, yes, you're absolutely right that there is no such style as "Honey Tripel", but the key to Belgian ales is creativity, not slavish dedication to BJCP Style Guidelines. Besides, this one is going to be decided by popularity, not by certified beer judges, so maybe a very strong ale with the taste of honey will win some fans. Who knows?

I'm not sure how the contest is going to work, but it appears that somehow, if you're at 75th Street Brewery late on Saturday afternoon (3-5 p.m.), you'll have the opportunity to judge a homebrew contest! I doubt they're charging for the privilege (I don't claim to be an expert in beverage law, but I somehow doubt they can get away with selling beer produced by unlicensed brewers). If you're interested in learning more, check back here later today, or call the brewery. I'll call the brewery and see if I can post more details later today.

Local Options - Down South Grill on Main

I forgot to bring a lunch to work yesterday, and so I headed out at noon to find some carry-out to bring back to the office. Since I work nearby the best dine in/carry out cheap lunch spot in the city (possibly the universe), my car automatically headed toward Pancho's.

On the way there, though, I chided myself for predictability and decided to try something new. A few blocks south of Pancho's, near the intersection of 39th and Main, are two places that begged to be tried. Island Spice Caribbean promises something out of the ordinary, and I had recently noticed the Down South Grill in the space that used to be Antonio's next door to the space that used to be the Grand Emporium. (Yes, I just double-dated myself . . .)

I wound up choosing the Down South Grill for the simple reason that a Johnson County Beemer was tailgaiting me in the right lane of southbound Main, and there was a sweet, legal, unmetered parking spot right out front. Few responses to a tailgaiter are as satisfying as parking in front of him.

So, Down South Grill it was. Like its pizza place predecessor, it consists of a counter and a small bench for waiting. Nothing fancy here at all. The menu is posted on the wall, and consists of a few sandwiches (including a pork chop sandwich), a few "Cajun Po-Boys", wings, a chili dog, and a few basic sides. The combos include fries and a drink, so why not?

I chose the Cajun Chicken Po-Boy combo. For $6.49, I walked out with a styrofoam container jam packed with food, with a little hot sauce and catchup for the fries.

Normally, I tend to gush when I write about food found at a dive location. I would like to do so here, because the people working there were friendly, and only one other person visited during the time I was there. Every dollar that gets spent at a chain restaurant instead of a local operation is a slap in the face for diversity of choice and local flavor.

While I can't honestly gush about my Cajun Chicken Po-Boy sandwich, it was a huge portion of moderately-spicy chicken. The chicken wasn't breaded, which was a nice touch, and the roll was jammed with fresh lettuce, good tomatoes (the likes of which you will never find at a shareholder-owned food outlet), and a tasty mayo-based sauce. The fries were good, not great, and there were plenty of them. For $6.49, I got a reasonably good meal that I could not even finish - and I supported a restaurant owned by local people.

Next time you're thinking of driving through Wendy's, or stopping by Subway, think for a second about whether there isn't a local option. Kitty's burgers are better than Wendy's, and a "Number 1, Spicy" at Bella Napoli may be the best sandwich in Kansas City.

Anybody want to meet me at Island Spice Caribbean Restaurant next Tuesday? Here's the menu - it isn't cheap, but, come on, they have curried goat, and who wants cheap goat?! They might have cow's feet, if we're lucky. They even have a side dish they call "festival" - can you get a side of "festival" at Burger King? Or calaloo?

If we want interesting local options on Kansas City's food scene, we need to vote with our dollars.

Restaurant Critic Getting Schooled

Last night, at the Blogger Gathering, I met Owen Morris, who writes for the Pitch's Fat City food blog.

Naturally enough, the topic focused on food for a while before veering off into the legitimacy of being apolitical, and Owen impressed me with his knowledge and passion for food. When I checked out Fat City last night, I saw that he is actually taking advanced culinary classes at Johnson County Community College, and he's going to do a weekly diary about his experiences.

I'm looking forward to going through culinary classes vicariously.

Shake Down - Joel Goldman's WyCo Thriller

A while back, I received a free review copy of Shake Down, and I put off reading it until I had airplane time. Joel Goldman is a local lawyer, and this book is his 5th thriller. It's set in the greater Kansas City area, with most of the action taking place in the Argentine area.

The first mystery presented is the title. Is it "Shakedown" or "Shake Down"? The author's website and various reviews present it as a single word, while my copy has the compound word broken in half on the cover and spine. Like an empiricist detective, I'm sticking with what I see and using the two word approach.

Shake Down is kind of a fun read. It starts off with a multiple murder, and you know right off the bat who did it, but the mystery arises around the edges. Who fled the scene? Why is the central character suffering from episodes of shaking? Why does the voice switch from omniscient narrator to first person? Isn't it kind of condescending for the author to write about residents of Quindaro like specimens in a petri dish of poverty? Why would an editor allow hilariously stilted dialog to appear in an apparently serious book?

Alright, some of those aren't intended to be the mysteries presented, but they certainly arose in my mind upon reading the book . . .

How does one properly review a shameful pleasure?

Let me be positive - it was fun. I enjoyed reading about some of the nooks and crannies of Kansas City, and the portrayal of the law enforcement turf battles was interesting. The central character was a regular guy who we're supposed to believe is smart enough to track down criminals, but not smart enough to keep his wife from meeting his girlfriend. If you're interested in Kansas City, and enjoy mysteries, this book is a must-read.

But, sadly, that's about all the positivity I can muster here. Without spoilers, I can only point out that the web of relationships that lies at the heart of the story is both transparent and unconvincing. Several of the plot turns are just goofy, such as the near-tragic decision on who will confront the murderer. And the resolution of the book is as wishy-washy as you can get with dead bodies spread all over the place. You never get a real explanation for the shaking condition which is so central to the entire book, and the central character's romantic quandary remains unresolved.

But, those points aside, the real criticism of the book springs from the dialog. I annoyed my seatmate on the flight with several involuntary gasps and whoops of disbelief. Taken at random from the middle of the book:

"What do you want me to tell Troy?"
"Tell him the truth. Tell him that I asked you to help me and that, as far as you knew, I was acting in the course and scope of my official duties."
"You call that the truth?"
"I call that enough of the truth. You helped me out. I'll take the heat."

That's just a small sample of the tough guy, clipped language served up throughout the novel. If I were cruel, I would have hunted up some of the dialog between the main character and his middle-aged fantasy girlfriend. It's kind of like taking Guy Noir from Prairie Home Companion and plopping him into an eHarmony commercial.

I've struggled with writing this review. Really, this book is awful - execrable dialog with an implausible plot, and minority characters who are so shallow I would accuse the author of racism if he had demonstrated he could write believable characters of any ethnicity.

But, despite all that, I enjoyed reading the book. And, when you're talking about a mystery/thriller set in your hometown, that's probably enough. I had a few laughs, it kept the pages turning, and I'd recommend it to anyone looking for fun airplane or beach reading.

Hold on tight, stay up all night 'cause Rosie I'm comin' on strong

A while back, I pondered whether it would be worth it to blow a thousand bucks on last night's Springsteen concert. Back when it looked like I would need to resort to a ticket broker, I pondered

Do you blow a grand on a single show? What if he has an off night? What if the people in front of me are tall? Can one show really be worth that kind of money? Would I walk out of the Sprint Center thinking "Great show, but . . ."?

I don't know. Maybe. Springsteen shows are legendary. Seeing a great artist live is a totally different experience than listening to the music itself. What is the proper price of a lasting memory?

All my worries were for baseless. A friend helped me out, and I wound up with 4 fantastic seats at face value. Sam, my music-savvy son, came home from New York for the show, so Sam, Robin, Ancillary Adams and I took the convertible down to the Crossroads, grabbed a great dinner and better beer at Grinder's, and then strolled to the Sprint Center for 3 hours of hard-working rock and roll the likes of which I've never seen before.

Here's a setlist Sam found on a fan sight, with tour premiers in all-caps:
1. RICKY WANTS A MAN
2. Cynthia
3. Radio Nowhere
4. No Surrender
5. Out in the Street
6. Hungry Heart
7. Spirit in the Night
(Boys, as sung by Max, by request) - we'll clarify this tomorrow [this was based on an audience request - "let max sing" - and it's a shirelles cover, the first song that ringo ever sang for the beatles)
8. Cadillac Ranch
9. Workin' on the Highway
10. IT'S ALL OVER NOW
11. Candy's Room
12. Gypsy Biker
13. Youngstown
14. The Promised Land
15. Livin' in the Future
16. Mary's Place
17. DEVILS AND DUST (solo acoustic)
18. The Rising
19. Last to Die
20. Long Walk Home
21. Badlands

22. 4th of July, Asbury Park (Sandy)
23. 10th Avenue Freeze-out
24. Born to Run
25. Rosalita
26. American Land

27. SAVE THE LAST DANCE FOR ME
28. Dancing in the Dark
29. ROCKIN' ALL OVER THE WORLD
30.????????????????? [some irish drinking-y song]

If you're a Springsteen fan, that's a hell of a show. But now for the overwhelming question - would it have been worth a grand for my wife and I to see it?

Shockingly (to a skinflint like me), yes, it definitely would have been worth it. Springsteen plays every song like it's his once chance to get on stage and bust out the rock and roll star that we all wish we could be. His performances are great live versions of fantastic songs, but they're live in the best sense of the word - not slavish studio reproductions. Instead, they're improvised, enhanced, made more evocative by his guitar slashing and clowning with Steve Van Zandt. He brought a young girl on stage to dance with him to "Dancing in the Dark", and she carped the diem. The fans were adoring and knowledgeable (with the exception of a couple twits behind me wearing UMB lanyards who gabbed loudly during Bruce's only hushed moments). For just under 200 minutes, he gave Kansas City a rock and roll performance with intensity, integrity and power unlike anything I've ever seen before. When Bruce shouts "One, Two, Three", you'd better be ready to get your fist in the air.

The Sprint Center itself looked great. Plenty of room in the concourses, comfortable seating (not that I used mine much), and pretty good acoustics for a concrete bowl. Ushers and security were effective but not obtrusive.

A thoroughly excellent show. A hoped-for spectacular that lived up to crazy expectations. Yeah, it was all that.

John McCain is Not Too Rich to be President

It's fun to make fun of John McCain right now.

He doesn't know how many houses he owns.

He spends more than a quarter million a year on servants.

He thinks you have to earn $5 million to be rich.

He wears $500 loafers.

Etc.

But, I ask my fellow Democrats - are those reasons to vote against him? Do those facts make Obama the superior candidate?

John F. Kennedy had some serious coin. John Kerry and John Edwards don't worry about the price of milk.

When we indulge in our childish mocking, we buy into the same silly non-issues that typify our discourse. We take our eyes off the reasons that John McCain is the wrong choice (Iraq, Iran, Supreme Court, Tax Breaks for the Wealthy, Environmental Degradation, Spying on Americans, Pro-Torture, etc.). At the same time, we legitimize the attention which will come to whatever non-issue the Right Wing Noise Machine generates about Obama. I don't want this election to turn on what brand of sunglasses Obama prefers, or the fabric of his socks.

On the other hand, this sort of nonsense sways votes. As has been demonstrated in past elections (in a spirit of bipartisanship, I won't name which), a significant portion of voters cast their ballots on "feelings" or factors other than a rigorous analysis of which candidate holds positions they share. If the Democrats limit their debate to the high ground of policy discussion, the Republicans will run the table with all their friends in low places.

It's a sad fact of democracy that elections don't always get decided on the issues I would choose. So, I regretfully acknowledge the importance of non-issues, and hope that those who focus on them for the Democrats sway at least as many foolish people as those who focus on them for the Republicans.

There ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys; There's only you and me and we just disagree . . .

Let me start with an anecdote.

In litigation, many decisions are left to the discretion of the trial judge. While there are rules guiding who should be allowed to serve on a jury, or what evidence should be allowed to be presented, or dozens of other decisions that get made in the course of bringing a case to trial, many of them are left to the discretion of the trial judge.

When I was a young lawyer, I was helping one of my heroes try a case. After a long day of trial work, I was complaining that the judge had totally blown a decision to our detriment. "Dan, it was a decision within his discretion," he said, taking a drag on his pipe (yes, it was that long ago that he was smoking a pipe in the office). "He has the discretion to be wrong, too."

In other words, the judge's job is to make the decision and my job was to persuade. Complaining after the fact was pointless.

A friend who knows me pretty well emailed me this week asking whether I still support certain city councilmembers after they signed on to the misguided volunteer ordinance. Like me, this person views the attack on volunteers for the city as a premature over-reaction to an undecided lawsuit and a harmful restriction on the role of volunteers in our city. I've written to them all, in a very polite and professional manner, and only one (Jan Marcason) has even bothered to reply. (Yes, I'm disappointed with the other 8, some of whom are quite efficient in writing me when they're seeking support.)

I disagree with people all the time. I strongly disagree with people on occasion. I strongly disagree with nine members of the City Council on this. I've looked at the issue from the idealist perspective, I've looked at it from the practical perspective, I've looked at it from the perspective of a Funkhouser supporter, and I've looked at it from the perspective of how I would feel if someone else were in the Mayor's office, making decisions I would oppose.

It remains my opinion that this is a very bad ordinance, chock-full of unintended consequences and bad results.

But nine city councilmembers disagree with me. And they, in Ted Mullen's description, have the discretion to be wrong.

Does this mean the rest need to be voted out? Does this mean that I can assume that the others are either so stupid they can't see things as clearly as I do, or so fearful of Tony's criticism that they panicked, or that they've joined with the entrenched development crowd to undermine Funkhouser's attempts to stop the give-aways? Are all 9 stupid, panicked and/or corrupt?

Of course not. (Not all 9, anyhow.)

Perhaps, unlikely as it seems, I'm somehow missing out on understanding how throwing up huge, expensive hurdles on volunteerism is actually a good thing.

Perhaps, as happens in real life, inexplicable and apparently wrong steps are taken in a journey toward a greater result.

Perhaps they're just wrong.

For now, I'm going to go with the final explanation. They have the discretion to be wrong, and they blew it.

That doesn't mean that they're bad people, or even bad councilmembers. I disagree with them on this. I disagreed with them on their irrational decision to shower Wayne Cauthen with money and job-security after he had been caught lying on his resume, and several of them now privately admit that they were wrong.

None of us is perfect, city councilmembers and bloggers most definitely included.

If a judge consistently makes bad calls with his or her discretion, smart lawyers start taking a "change of judge" (an automatic right to get the judge changed at the beginning of a case) when that judge gets assigned to their cases. But not after a couple of bad decisions. That's just disagreement - but you learn to be alert for a pattern.

Told Ya So . . .

The Summer Olympics are being torn with conflict over who the real winners should be.

Once again, the quality of judging is being attacked by those who chose to compete in a sport scored by the whims of nonpartipants. In gymnastics, the bronze medalist landed on her knees, but prevailed over cleaner efforts. Some are complaining that the athletes are too young - though I don't hear any athletes in real sports worrying that they'll get whipped by a 5th grade phenom. In greco-roman wrestling, the bronze medalist was so disgusted by the judging that he threw away his medal in the center of the ring. Even before the Spanish synchronized swimmers got in the pool, silly judges disqualified their swimsuits (alas, they brought along spares). Meanwhile, analysts are calculating the REAL Olympic medal count by ignoring all the judged sports and focusing on competitions that are decided on the field of play, rather than in the subjective feelings of some watcher.

In short, judged competitions breed acrimony (Sacramone?), not healthy athletic spirit. If prima donnas choose to specialize in a sport where their victory comes not on the field of play but at a judge's table, they ought to either accept the results or switch to a sport with objective scoring.

Having recently written on this topic and having heard impassioned defenses of such nonsports as synchronized diving and Dancesport (still makes me giggle to type that one), I realize that there are people who really like to watch nonsports, and the reason they want to be in the Olympics is because nobody will pay attention to them if they don't glom onto a real athletic competition, with true athletes competing in legitimate sports.

Some of us admire the Olympic motto ("Faster, higher, stronger") and some of us prefer the ethos of Project Runway ("Glam, glitter, fabulous"). I'm all about making everyone happy, but I hate to see a great institution like the Olympics being dragged through the mud of partiality simply because nonsports are destroying the spirit of actual competition.

Wouldn't it make everyone happier if we just separated the two? Every four years, we could have the Glam Olympics staged in someplace like Las Vegas or Atlantic City - a first class entertainment venue - and really put on a show. We could drop the pretense of "expert judges" (who seem to please nobody, from within or outside the sport) - and select winners through telephone survey, like American Idol does.

By all means, give the nonsports the attention they crave.

But don't sully the Olympic spirit by hosting a bunch of whiners complaining that their sports aren't scored fairly. We all agree on they aren't scored fairly, which is why the Olympics should be for real sports, and Las Vegas should be for glitzy spectacles.

No Post this Morning

Spent my morning composing a letter to my city council, offering a little direction before they make it illegal for a volunteer to speak up.

Everything's Fine

Yesterday, I backed the rental minivan out from a carport near the campus of Tulane University. When I got to the corner, I took a last look through the sideview mirror at the low-slung duplex with bananas growing in the backyard. Inside, I knew my daughter was tearfully adjusting to being alone in the space she so eagerly sought and cheerfully decorated. Next to me in the van, her mother tearfully adjusted to leaving her beloved daughter behind. I willed back the waterworks - the streets of New Orleans still require sharp vision to dodge deep holes and buckling pavement - but drove with a thick lump in my throat.

It was a great summer. She has a fantastic wit, a humorous command of slang and a sharply observant eye for the foibles and fashions of those around her. This summer, she socialized with our friends, invited her friends to our home, and adopted Ancillary Adams as a brother. "Dad" and "mom" have been mostly abandoned in favor of our first names, except when asking a favor. Or when saying goodbye a few seconds before we left.

Despite the tears, everything is fine. She's completely capable of setting up a household, starting up utilities, and assembling furniture without my participation. She's happy to accept a little help, but we all knew she didn't need us there, really. She's plenty resourceful. She'll expand her cooking well beyond mac cheese and sandwiches over the coming months, and she won't scream for me to dispatch the occasional tropical-sized New Orleans bug. She dodged Katrina, for Pete's sake; she's capable enough to handle what's ahead of her.

The change in dependency is profound. She's 21, and living in one of America's most dangerous but alluring cities. Next year, she may well be starting two years in a country I couldn't find on a map today. Over the summer, I teased her about being dependent on her hair straightener, but her interest in the third world demonstrates that it's not a dependency, but merely something that's nice to have around when it fits into her life.

I could learn a lesson here, I suppose. If dependency is the key to our relationship, maturation will weaken the bond until it scarcely exists at all.

The tears yesterday didn't come from fear or from concern that she couldn't meet the challenges ahead of her. She's well-equipped with brains and street-savvy to tearlessly wave goodbye to whatever assistance we could offer. Our help, while generously given and gratefully accepted, was nothing.

This is what we raised her for. From birth, we knew she would go forth into the world and change it for the better. We didn't seek to bring her up as someone who would seek our advice and approval for every decision, though we were there with both if she wanted them. We never believed her when she, as a little girl, spoke of buying the house next door and walking with us to the Circle K to buy slushies. It was a heart-warming fantasy, but we never really wanted that result, and we certainly won't be getting it.

The tears yesterday, and the lump in my throat, did not come from something amiss. None of us were surprised, or disappointed, or hurt. While I don't yet know what the future holds for our little girl, that lack of clarity brings expanded horizons instead of trepidation.

Nothing's wrong. I just miss her. But, really, everything's fine.

Kneejerk Nine Attack Volunteers - Tony Rules Their World

In a display of shocking weakness, 9 City Councilmembers have cosponsored an ordinance attacking the role of volunteers in Kansas City. It is a transparent buckling to pressure put on them by Tony's Kansas City - a local anti-Funkhouser blog. In a huge over-reaction to that pressure, the kneejerk nine have proposed huge hurdles to volunteerism that would effectively shut down many avenues of service, and prevent the most expert minds from aiding our boards and commissions. Their service, however, would be rather pointless in the post-volunteer world the kneejerk nine propose, in that our best and brightest would be prohibited from giving direction to any city employee, elected or appointed officials or other volunteers.

A better and wiser council would appreciate the direction offered by the many volunteers who serve in so many roles aiding our city. But, alas, they prefer to take the direction of Tony's Kansas City.

Here's how it works. Every single day, Tony's Kansas City posts at least one attack on Mark Funkhouser and his family. Every single day. On many days, he will post multiple attacks, but, in a display of dogged OCD and creativity, Tony manages to find something nasty to say every single day. It's quite impressive, really.

(I don't blame Tony for his obsession, frankly, because I understand that, for him, his blog is about the art of provocation. And he's good at it - even better than I thought. As a supporter of Funkhouser and our city, and an observer of the impact that a steady stream of sustained nastiness can have on even a public figure, I wish he had chosen another target, but Tony's trying to make a point about the public and media, and Funkhouser has served as his subject.)

Every day, these councilmembers and their staff read Tony's attack. Every single day, they read sarcastic, derisive material about the Mayor's wife.

In the insular world of the political inside, one voice heard 365 times become oddly equivalent to 365 voices. And if Tony's topic of the day is on the mind of every single staffer and fellow councilmember, then, by gosh and by golly, every single person in the city must be talking about it, too! So, in the face of the overwhelming pressure of every single voice in the city shouting vitriol about the Mayor's wife, they feel compelled to act. Even if the voice is really one voice amplified by their own gullibility, and even if the action is going to harm the city in ways we cannot begin to tally.

Meanwhile, the average voter in the city has no idea who Gloria Squitiro is, and is looking forward to reelecting Funkhouser if satisfaction with basic services climbs.

If the proposed ordinance becomes law, each and every volunteer for the city will be forced to undergo the complete battery of trainings deemed essential by the kneejerk nine. "The training would include anti-discrimination, anti-harassment and anti-violence in the workplace policies, as well the policy against nepotism." I'm not aware of what outside consultants will be hired to conduct all of this training, but I suspect that somewhere in this fair city of ours, some training consultants are toasting the kneejerk nine with fine champagne. Does anybody have any idea how much this silliness will cost?

Perhaps my financial concerns are overblown, though. Perhaps no trainings will be necessary at all. Who is going to waste their time volunteering if their direction will not only go unheeded, it will be prohibited? Who would want to risk volunteering to coach a parks department Tee-ball team if you'll be guilty of violating an ordinance when you "direct" Suzy's mommy to bring snacks for the next game, and it turns out that Suzy's mommy is a city employee who you are forbidden to give direction to. Who wants to serve on a board or commission if you are forbidden from offering direction?

We all know that's not really what the kneejerk nine want. The kneejerk nine want Gloria Squitiro to abandon her service to the city, and that's all. The rest of this poorly thought-out scheme is window-dressing to cover their cowardice.

I hope our Mayor has the wisdom to veto this misguided response to a talented blogger.

The Rude Pundit Explains the "Hot Chicks Dig Obama" Ad

If "coarse" doesn't appeal to you, then you should avoid clicking on this link, which leads to The Rude Pundit's analysis of John McCain's most recent web ad, "The Fan Club".

So far, though, it makes the most logical explanation of why McCain thinks he should advertise the fact that some white women think highly of his African-American opponent.

The Non-Scary Guide to Getting Involved in Politics

A reader wrote me an email recently in response to a post I had done about working for Jason Kander's campaign. "How did you get involved? What is it like to get involved? What if you don't know the right people?" Those are great questions that probably linger in the minds of a lot of potential volunteers who, in the absence of answers, wind up staying home.

How to Get Involved: The easiest way to get involved in a campaign is to call the candidate, or someone with his or her campaign. If you're interested in getting involved more generally, or if you're focused more on a cause than a campaign, then contact an organization with a good reputation for doing good work. Either way, use phone or email to contact the people involved, and they will be eager to get you involved.

(UPDATE: This coming weekend in Kansas City offers a rare opportunity to jumpstart your involvement. On Saturday, from 9-4 at the Uptown, the 21st Century Democrats are offering a FREE training as part of a program to develop "500 urban activists in field skills such as targeting, door-to-door communications, canvassing, data collection and analysis, message development and other important elements for winning elections". If you want to get involved, I cannnot imagine a better way to do so . . . Go here and follow the links to learn more and sign up.)

What to Expect: Working for a campaign is not like The West Wing, or even Primary Colors. There's a whole lot more phone-banking and envelope stuffing involved than there is policy discussion. You might as well leave your ego at the door, because a campaign runs on workers' hands, not their brains.

That said, remember that you are a volunteer, and can fairly and justifiably decline the opportunity to take on a task you don't like. If calling people and asking them if they would like to attend a forum with your candidate is outside your comfort zone, then say that to the person who is asking you to do it. Trust me, they'll find something more to your liking.

What If You Don't Know the Right People: Volunteering for a campaign is a great way to meet energetic, involved, interesting people, but it can be terribly intimidating. Often, the people you will be working with already know each other, and it can feel a bit like being the new kid in school. It can bring out the agoraphobic in even the most gregarious person.

Most of the time, that phase lasts for about 5 minutes. Volunteers are friendly people. They want to know you as much as you want to know them. They already like you because they appreciate the help and they agree with you about the person or cause you are mutually supporting. Small talk is really easy with this crowd. "When did you first get involved with (candidate or cause)? Are you originally from Kansas City? Have you worked on any other campaigns?" Trust me, by the end of your shift, you will not feel like the new kid in school.

It's not too late to get involved for the November elections. If the presidential race has your attention, the Obama HQ is at Gillham and Linwood - just walk in and tell them you want to volunteer. If you want a more grassroots, local campaign, I think that Joe Volpe's race is going to be a lot of fun, and he even has an "I Want to Volunteer" button on his homepage. Whatever race has your attention, it should be easy to find a campaign that wants your time and effort.

I know it's a little intimidating to get involved in a campaign, but I can assure you that it's easy to do, the work is unexciting but important, and the people are great. Believe me, election night feels entirely different when you've worked on a campaign, and, win or lose, you will feel like you've played a kind of significant role in helping Democracy work. You will have.

Vincent Gauthier Can Kiss My Fine White . . .

T-shirt.

I've only met the guy once or twice, and everyone says he's a great guy, but Monday's post on the Pitch's Plog convinced me that he may be the source of the type of small-minded fashion intolerance that has dogged my days ever since my mother arbitrarily told me I couldn't wear striped shirts with plaid shorts.

Here's the part of the posting that torqued my tidy whities -

It was at this point that Gauthier blew my mind – he made me aware of a style faux pas that I’d never even thought to be annoyed by. “I don’t like when guys wear polo shirts unbuttoned so their white t-shirts show underneath,” he said. “That’s why you wear v-necks – so it doesn’t show.” He pulled down the collar of his shirt to show the v-neck artfully hidden underneath.

Gauthier bet me a beer that the guy with his back to us in a neighboring booth was committing the visible-undershirt sin. Sure enough, he was, and after a quick glance around Bo Ling’s we counted half a dozen more men with the same issue. Great. Now I owe Gauthier a beer and I have a new grievance with menswear.

What?!?!?!

Who says I can't wear regular t-shirts under polo shirts?!?!?

I can tell you right now, I'm not going to run out and buy a whole new set of t-shirts just so Vincent Gauthier and Nadia Pflaum aren't offended by the glaring white of the top of my t-shirt. Uh-uh, not gonna happen.

And, from the sounds of things at Bo-Ling's that day, the vast majority of men agree with me on this. Let's stick together on this, guys - we can nip this one in the bud if none of us starts buckling to this freshly-minted attempt to tell us what to wear.

Today, the Gauthier Rule on t-shirts is only a personal quirk, with no force to make us conform. Already, it's gained one proponent, in the form of a Pitch writer who runs around town taking pictures of people because of their "sense of style". It could spread easily - those of us with daughters know that middle-aged guys are presumed guilty of fashion faux pas.

Ballroom Dancing (DanceSport!), Synchronized Diving and the Meaning of Sport

I love watching the Olympics - but the Beijing Olympics are proving just how right I was back when I questioned whether Ballroom Dancing should be in the Olympics.

In yet another assault on all that is decent and traditional, the International Olympic Committee is considering adding Ballroom Dancing, a/k/a DanceSport (no, I'm not kidding) to the Olympics roster. Just what the world needs - another "sport" without a ball, without a goal, but with a panel of judges.

Hilariously, the new trend is to synchonize things. Synchronized swimming burst on the comedy scene several years ago, and now we've moved onto synchronized diving. It seems the proponents of silly non-sports have decided that if they can add more gimmicks and entertainment value to the activity, it will justify calling it an Olympic sport.

Obviously, it can't end there. I think the next trend will be to have a "Project Runway" competition added on to the activity. Participants will be called on to design their own costumes in less than 45 minutes using only materials supplied. Wouldn't that be hot tranny fun?

The difference between entertainment and sport is that sport has objective scoring - real scores based on real, non-subjective happenings. The other things are truly impressive physical activities, but they don't belong in the Olympics. The Olympic Motto is "Swifter, Higher, Stronger". The ancient Greeks didn't seek "Prettier, Perkier, More Graceful".

Cokie Roberts, John McCain, and the Foreign Land of Hawaii

Cokie Roberts is catching a little heat today because she twice has attacked Barack Obama for vacationing this week in Hawaii, which she describes as "some sort of foreign exotic place." She actually criticized him for not being American enough, because he went to visit his grandmother where she lives, in one of America's 50 states.

Predictably, the leftwing blogosphere is agog at her foolishness. They quite correctly pick up on the fact that the traditional media will stretch to any length if they can make Barack Obama seem scary and different. This is not the longest stretch - merely the most recent and most transparently stupid.

But this particular mistake points to something bigger. When Cokie Roberts was born, all the way through her mid-teens, Hawaii was NOT a state. She was 15 when Hawaii finally became a state - well past the age of geography quizzes and memorizing state capitals.

Like John McCain, Cokie Roberts came of age in an America of only 48 states. To John McCain and Cokie Roberts, Alaska and Hawaii remain foreign, exotic lands. Their America - the America they learned about when they were in elementary school, the America they first pledged allegiance to, the America they grew up with - was not the America of today.

This year's election will be an historic generational shift. The White House will shift from those who view America as something less than what it really is to those who grew up in a country with 50 great states.

And if that makes Cokie Roberts feel like she's a stranger in s strange new land, so be it.

The new America does not see Hawaii as "some sort of foreign exotic place". It's America, and it is time to have a leader from the generation that knows it.

Should Brookside Secede from the Union?

In the comments to my bit of McCain/Hilton fun, a commenter tossed out this bit of wildly off-topic but engaging thought provocation - "Can/Should the Brookside area schools separate from the KCMSD?".

It's tough to have a conversation about the Kansas City Metropolitan School District. First, there is sooo much misinformation out there. To some (mostly those from the suburbs who have little personal experience), the entire district is a catastrophe of corrupt administration, incompetent teachers, uncaring parents and unteachable students. For others, the KCMSD represents a source of political power, both as a potential springboard to other offices and as a fiefdom for those who prefer to remain in place. Still others look at the KCMSD as employment - an employer in labor negotiations which are intensifying to the point of a possible strike.

It's easy to respond to the suggestion of a Brookside secession with a quick and dirty charge of racism. Or, at least, class bias. Let's get the first class kids off the Titanic now, and God bless the souls left behind.

But that easy response may not be entirely fair. As the KCMSD administration and board have failed to provide a consistently good - heck, even a consistently decent - education to all (or even a majority) of their students, it's been fair to lose faith. Sure, it's a wonderful thing to hold hands and believe that the School District can turn around and accomplish great things, but when will we see accreditation? Is that so much to ask? If it isn't, then let's have it. If it is, then who can blame people for looking to jump ship?

And who can blame the teachers for wanting to improve their pay and working conditions?

And who can blame the administration for under-performing when the board chops off the head without explanation or apparent reason?

And who can blame the Board for reacting with micromanagement when their constituents blame them for problems they oversee?

And who can blame people like my commenter for wanting to throw up their hands and try to improve the educational prospects of at least some of the children at the screaming intersection of all of these conflicting interests?

This is the point in a typical blog post where I put forth my brilliantly thought-out, morally uplifting and shockingly practical solution . . .

I don't have one. Sorry. And that "sorry" is truly, deeply sincere.

I do have a couple thoughts, though, about secession as a solution. It's not going to happen. Victor Callahan was able to muscle through a secession plan for the Independence schools because they are, after all, in Independence, and nobody bothered to strongly oppose him in Jefferson City. After he did such a terrible job with the legislation, creating an ongoing litigation debacle that ought to leave him begging forgiveness from his better peers, I doubt that Jefferson City legislators are going to be eager to hear about more poorly thought-out half-solutions to what everyone knows is a bigger problem.

The solution doesn't lie in Jefferson City. The solution, if there is one, must be found in Kansas City. I like to think that we took a step toward that solution when we elected Airick Leonard West to the School Board, but you're fooling yourself if you believe that was enough.

Even he doesn't think that was enough. Go look at his website - or, more accurately, the website of Kansas Citians United for Educational Achievement.

If you want to go ahead and work for a break-away republic in Brookside, I admire your willingness to think about the possibility of improving educational outcomes for at least some of our students. I really don't think it's going to work, though, and I think that we can take what we have and improve it.

More Paris Hilton/John McCain Fun

If you enjoyed the video that Paris Hilton did in response to John McCain's ad comparing Obama to her because they're both better-liked than he is, you might enjoy their IM transcript.

Should Donnelly Seek a Recount?

Tuesday night's primary surprised a lot of people, myself very much included. As the vote counts trickled in, the margin between Koster and Donnelly bounced around in the hundreds. When I finally went to bed, I hoped that I would wake up to find that Margaret Donnelly had managed to scrape together enough votes to bring in a winner.

As of this writing, fewer than 900 votes separate Koster and Donnelly. 500 votes in St. Louis County were not counted. Yesterday morning, Margaret Donnelly issued the following statement:

At this time we are waiting for certification from the Secretary of State's office. We know that there are still over 500 votes that have not been counted in St. Louis County. And while we are not aware of similar situations elsewhere, we have not had the time to investigate other election jurisdictions. After certification we will weigh our options, including asking for a recount.

A recount often results in changed totals, and it could strengthen Koster's margin, or reverse it.

Meanwhile, the Republican AG nominee, Mike Gibbons, would like nothing more than an extended fight between the Democrats.

So, readers, what should Margaret Donnelly do? Should she seek a recount? Should she accept the reported totals as they stand, and begin the process of welcoming Chris Koster into the party, now that he's been through the most elaborate and painful initiation ritual since hell week at the KA house?

Does Funkhouser Know What He's Doing?

A while back, I read a quotation something like "If a person tells you that 2 + 2 = 5, that's a mistake, but if a person tells you that 2 + 2 = 7,264, that's not a mistake, that's a different system."

One of the basic rules of politics is that you make certain you get complete credit for whatever good that you do. Politicians treat credit like a zero-sum resource - the more you get, the better. That's why ribbon-cuttings and award dinners are the favored activities of so many politicians.

Yesterday, Mayor Mark Funkhouser appeared to have forgotten that rule. In announcing his intention to join the National Coalition of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, he unnecessarily diluted the focus on himself and shared the stage with Councilmember Cathy Jolly, Chair of the Public Safety and Neighborhoods Committee, head cop Jim Corwin, and mayors who are already members of the coalition, such as Mayor Joe Reardon of Kansas City, Kansas; Mayor William Rodgers of Edwardsville, Kansas; and Mayor Carl Wilkes of Merriam, Kansas. Not only did he share credit within the city - he brought along living proof that this move is neither unique nor novel.

And it gets worse! He didn't even take the opportunity to whip out a quill pen and sign a parchment scroll, or any other publicity stunt to make his statesmanship the focus of the event. Instead, the only real visual image from the event was a pile of dangerous weapons - he focused attention on the seriousness of the problem instead of the "brilliance" of his "solution".

And, yes, it gets even worse than that! He didn't even have the political skills to sign the statement of principles of the organization! Instead, he will be introducing a resolution to the entire council that will direct him to join the coalition by signing its principles. And he's even doing that through co-sponsorship with Cathy Jolly!

Any moron can see that the proper way to do this was to have a huge press conference with a brass band and a huge gold pen emblazoned with MAYOR.

Instead, Funkhouser is sharing credit for a good thing, and getting the entire council on board for it. He's focusing on the problem rather than on himself.

Perhaps that's not a mistake. Perhaps that's a different system.

Race for the 44th Ends Peacefully

One of the underlying themes of the Kander/Coffman campaign has been the issue of dirty campaigning. Who would do it, when, and how much? Like the wired boats floating in Gotham City harbor in The Dark Knight, each campaign has sat there, feeling vulnerable, wondering if the other will be quicker to act.

No movie spoiler here.

In this case, at least, it appears that neither boat triggered the other's bomb. Neither Amy Coffman nor Jason Kander launched the kind of attacks that we all feared. Bravo to them both.

That is not to say that there aren't quibbles that may fuel post-election conversations. Jason Kander's mailer contrasting his and Amy's positions on lobbyists was a strong piece, and left no doubts in anybody's minds about which candidate was closer to lobbyists. From the other side, Amy Coffman's treasurer falsely claimed that Jeff Roe (to carry the prior metaphor one step further, Jeff Roe is the Joker) had endorsed Jason Kander, and Tony's KC repeated the exaggeration.

In the grand scheme of things, though, this has been a pretty darned good race. Any of the three candidates would be a fine representative for the 44th District, and each of them kept their dignity throughout the campaign. Whatever the vote totals are at the end of the day, I hope each of them is glad to have participated in the process.

Now that the primaries are over, let's run the table in November!

Old School Ranting

Today is Percy Bysshe Shelley's birthday, and, in honor of the occasion, take a second to enjoy one of his sonnets:

Sonnet: England in 1819

An old, mad, blind, despised, and dying king,--
Princes, the dregs of their dull race, who
Through public scorn,--mud from a muddy spring,--
Rulers who neither see, nor feel, nor know,
But leech-like to their fainting country cling,
Till they drop, blind in blood, without a blow,--
A people starved and stabbed in the untilled field,--
An army, which liberticide and prey
Makes as a two-edged sword to all who wield,--
Golden and sanguine laws which tempt and slay;
Religion Christless, Godless--a book sealed;
A Senate, Time's worst statute unrepealed,--
Are graves, from which a glorious Phantom may
Burst, to illumine our tempestuous day.

He was, of course, writing about the George of his day. As far as I know, though, the rightwing bloggers of the time did not accuse him of suffering from George Derangement Syndrome . . .

Did The Coffman Campaign Go Negative - on Coffman?

A friend who knows of my support for Jason Kander in the race for the 44th District handed me the above mailer, and asked what I thought of it. The black and yellow (nature's warning colors), the grainy black-and-white photo, the highlighted, all-caps "EVIL LOBBYISTS", and even the bright yellow CAUTION. At first glance, this piece appears to be an attack on Ms. Coffman.

On second glance, too, the piece seems to be attacking Coffman. It attempts to identify Amy Coffman as an "advocate", but acknowledges that "Often, the difference between a lobbyist and an advocate is simply that an advocate lobbies for an issue you support." This sage piece of wisdom appears directly next to a WARNING that "You Can't Always Believe What You Hear". Double-talk next to a warning like that? Really?

Political observers are probably surprised to see Amy Coffman's return address show up on the front of the card, along with a claim that it was "Paid for by Friends of Theresa Garza". That, along with the use of first person language on the piece, provokes concerns about whether there is a little bit of Koster-like coordination between committees that are legally banned from coordinating their efforts.

The subtle insider joke appears, though, in the form of a grammatical error at the bottom of the piece. "We need more, not less, elected officials . . ."? English teachers throughout the district are shouting "more, not FEWER!!!!" (Struggles with written expression have dogged the campaign.)

Remember when I called upon all candidates to eschew third-party mailings in this race? I was speaking from a position of idealism then - now I realize I was offering practical advice, as well.

Endorsements that Really Aren't My Business . . .

I already announced my endorsements on the races that I get to vote in (go Nixon, Page, Carnahan, Zweifel, Harris, Cleaver, Kander, Kanatzar, Bullard, Bough and Weir!!!!), but I can't help speaking up on a few other races. So here are my choices (not necessarily predictions, since I hate to put my sterling reputation for prescience on the line in races I haven't seen up close and personal) for races I won't be voting in.

FOR REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR - Kenny Hulshof - Come on, Republicans, you really need to get your stuff together if you want to rebound in 2012. Let the healing begin now. Sarah Steelman is too independent and too honest to be a dependable Republican, and you know it. Your party prefers authority and stodgy old ideas, and Kenny Hulshof is your man. In your heart, you know he's a return to the good old John Ashcroft days, and that's the only way you stand a chance of getting the rightwing mojo back. If you select Sarah Steelman, you're going to get stuck with a whole bunch of free-thinking individualists, and you know that's not your style.

FOR CONGRESS, 9TH DISTRICT - Steve Gaw - Steve Gaw is the candidate who will represent his district. He's not as liberal as I am, but neither is his district. But, really, the reason I'm supporting him is that I worked with him when I was a student intern in the Department of Revenue decades ago. There's no way he would remember me - I was a faceless worker bee, but I remember that he always treated me with respect and genuine kindness. They say that character shows through in the way you treat people who aren't in a position to help you advance, and Steve's character was sterling.

FOR CIRCUIT JUDGE, 17th CIRCUIT - Karl Timmerman - I've already written about my reasons for supporting Karl Timmerman. In selecting a judge, I care a whole lot less about party affiliation than I do about integrity. Karl Timmerman is an immigrant who has fought for this country in Vietnam and risen to be named the Missouri Lawyer of the Year in 2007. He will give all persons in his courtroom the same respect and fair treatment under the law that we all deserve.

Any other races I should be calling?

Is Beth Low's Seat in Danger?

This ought to be a great year for the Democrats in Missouri. Hopes are high that we will win back a large number of legislative seats and executive offices. Add to that the prospect of Obama's two dozen offices in Missouri fueling further gains, and this state could have a very, very blue year.

It would be a shame for one of Kansas City's bluest districts to change colors in such a year.

While it's unlikely, it's possible. One prominent local Democrat told me only two weeks ago that Beth is unopposed this cycle. And she's been running as if she's unopposed. She has no campaign website, and she's spent 50% more on donations to campaigns of other candidates this cycle than she has on her own campaign, leaving her with less than $5,000 in cash on hand. On top of that, the candidates she's supporting are not even being embraced by local democrats - not a whole lot of people are pleased to make donations to Beth Low only to find out that their money is winding up in the coffers of Democrats they don't support and who are going to lose in their primaries.

Meanwhile, Lance Weber is mounting a stealthy campaign as a Libertarian, meeting people in coffee shops and neighborhood meetings. He's a young guy with an engaging manner and a good command of citizen interests. He has spent almost no money at this stage, but, if he cobbles together a bunch of attorney contributions from lawyers who appreciate having legislators who understand the court system, and if he attracts the attention of the national libertarians who would love nothing more than to pick up a shiny blue jewel of a seat like Missouri's 39th, he could leave a lot of local politicos with one horrible shock on an otherwise glorious election day in November.

I hope it doesn't happen. Beth Low's a fine legislator and deserves another term. And, in fact, I think it is about 90% sure she will get that opportunity. But one big blitz at the end by a charismatic, hard-working, written-off candidate could change the picture.