Las Vegas Gleaner

Down the rabbit hole with Idle Speculator

Though your Gleaner is still struggling to recover from the shock of learning that John Ensign was passed over for the Nobel Peace Prize, perhaps it is time to turn some attention to who will replace him in the U.S. Senate.

Or as some guy put it in an email:

What say you on the question of Sandoval as the man to get appointment to fill the Ensign seat -vs- Heller. I have been saying that Heller hates DC and doesn't want 6 years as a senator. Plus, he is lazy and can ride the House back bench while being golden boy in rural NV.

But would he let Gibbo pass him over for the Ensign seat given that he passed on Reid race and that would mean he stays put or goes home?

I am curious what you might think....

Hmm, emailer, lots to chew on there and ... oh look, up in the sky. It's a conventional-wisdom-spouting talking head. It's a supercilious navel-gazing print pundit. It's ... Idle Speculator!

Gleaner: You see the aforementioned line of questioning, I-Spec. Ready, set, go!

IDLE SPECULATOR: Assuming Gibbons doesn't appoint himself...

Appointing Brian Sandoval to Ensign's Senate seat and thus removing him from the Republican gubernatorial primary would be such a brazen act of self-serving transparency on the part of Jim Gibbons that even the Review-Journal's publisher would see through it. In other words, it sounds like exactly the sort of thing Gibbons would do. It would also amount to an extremely aggressive snub to both Heller and the Nevada Republican Party, two entities that Gibbons feels have not been sufficiently supportive of the governor during his public descent into dementia -- and it is not uncommon for mental and/or emotionally imbalanced people, like Gibbons, to become obsessed with revenge.

Assuming -- charitably, perhaps -- that serial flip-flopper Joe Heck did not change his other mind, decide to quit his congressional campaign and flip back to the governor's race, the Sandoval appointment would  install Gibbons as the likely frontrunner for his party's gubernatorial nomination. At least that is the only conclusion we can draw pending tangible and undeniable proof, unpresented thus far, that North Las Vegas Mayor Mike Montandon actually does, in fact, exist. 

But so many other questions abound, perhaps not the least of which being, Who would want to be appointed to the U.S. Senate by, well, Jim Gibbons? Indeed, could anyone appointed by Gibbons be expected to seek, and win, support from voters in 2010? "Vote for me, I'm the Jim Gibbons senator." Goodness. Or given that Gibbons is so comprehensively discredited and despised by all but the most ill-informed of his party's teabagging base, might not it be more likely that a Gibbons appointment would necessarily be relegated to mere placeholder status -- the Nevada equivalent of Rod Blagojevich appointing Roland Burris?

Having said that, let's say Gibbons appoints Sandoval to the Senate, and Sandoval responds by saying fine, he will fill out the term until a 2010 election so that Nevada will have a senator, but meantime he's still going to run for governor. Against Gibbons! Yes, that would be very bizarre. Which is to say it seems like exactly the sort of thing that would happen to Gibbons.

His laziness aside (point well-taken, emailer), Heller, by virtue of the offices he has repeatedly won, would be the one and obvious Republican who could withstand the Gibbons taint and stand as a formidable candidate in a race against Shelley Berkley, Catherine Cortez Masto or whoever else might emerge on the Democratic side. Heller would be the sensible choice.

But at this point in both Jim Gibbons's political career and his mental deterioration, there is very little reason to expect him to heed any manner of decorum, logic or sense.

In fact, that one guy who owns the RV park and who is Gibbons's best friend and most trusted adviser might have the inside track on the Senate appointment. "I'm worried about my retirement funds," the RV dealer says to Gibbo. "Hey, I know how to get you a pretty good pension," Gibbons answers, enthusiastically, leaping yet again to let his petty and picayune worldview shape his most important decisions.

Not merely idle speculation, but fanciful as well, you say? Agreed. And yet who among us can rule out any possibility, no matter how far-fetched or counter-intuitive, when it comes to matters involving the mind, such as it is, of Jim Gibbons?

Gleaner: Um, thanks, I-Spec, I think. Give my regards to Ardent Pontificator. And by the way, the next time you drop in, try not to use phrases like "the Gibbons taint." Please.

Cheney snubbed again

OK, nobody's going to believe this, but while hearing some of the Nobel prizes being announced earlier in the week, I was wondering who might get the Peace Prize this year and it crossed my mind that they might give it to Obama. Honest to Betsy.

It's not that I think Obama himself has earned it. And Michael Tomasky makes an excellent point when he suggests Obama shouldn't show up to accept it. (He also notes, rightly, that watching the wingnuts go apoplectic over this will be a hoot).

But Gleaner readers will remember that pretty much the first thing that was ever written about Obama on this little website -- a sentiment that would be repeated often thereafter -- was that nothing would tell the world the U.S. isn't full-on batshit crazy anymore like electing a president whose middle name is Hussein. And for all the cartoonish fights over U.S. domestic policy and despite the hellishness that still ravages or threatens much of the world in one way or the other, there is no denying that since Obama replaced George W. Bush, the planet has a different vibe. 

The Nobel committee acknowledged that Obama hasn't caused peace to bust out all over. Instead, they hailed  "a new climate in international politics." Considering that prior to Obama, America seemed hell bent on a crusade to dominate the entire world through military aggression so as to carry out the plans of the one true god who loves America best, establishing a "new climate" may be a low bar. Perhaps the Nobel committee, on behalf of the rest of the world, was merely expressing a sigh of relief.

The Nobel committee also made some noises about trying to encourage and foster a newfound regard for sanity, sense and stuff like that in the field of international diplomacy, as if awarding the prize to Obama amounts to a some peace-centric twist on the doctrine of preemptive strike.

So anyway, I really did consider for a moment that they might give the prize to Obama.

But I didn't think they'd actually do it. Crazy Scandihoovians.

Ensign's greatest contribution yet to come

When members of Congress go to jail, it's usually accompanied by a bloodletting of sorts wherein other elected officials renounce all the campaign cash they have received from their newly imprisoned colleague, and make commensurate donations to a charity for the troops or whatever.

Well, those non-profit do-gooders will be rolling in dough when John Ensign gets frog-marched to the big house, if an analysis from the Center for Responsive Politics is any indication.

Since his dad bought him a ticket to Washington in 1994, Ensign has funneled $661,000 into the coffers of current or former lawmakers. "Only 12 other senators, past or present, have given more money through their leadership PACs and only nine senators have contributed more money through their candidate committees," CRP reports.

Finally, something Ensign is good at.

So where'd get Ensign get all that money in the first place? No, not from his father. Well, not directly anyway. Needless to say the biggest contributors to Ensign's campaign warchest over the years can be traced back to the industry for which little Johnny Casino is named.

Everyone already knew that local gambling-tourism industry executives have bankrolled Hairdo McWedgeshot's political hobby and are thus more responsible than anyone else for his "career." Nothing new there.

But perhaps we should use the CRP report as an opportunity to extend a note of gratitude to the local industry poohbahs. So again and as always, area gambling executives, thank you so very, very much.

You know how Nevadans are known for always wanting to tax somebody else? Well...

Just because everyone says that Nevada will never have an income tax no matter what forever and ever the end doesn't mean some innocent optimist can't hope that somebody somewhere might secretly be just a teensy bit curious anyway.

And so my latest CityLife column starts like this:

If Nevada had applied a 6 percent personal income tax on individuals with adjusted gross incomes of more than $200,000 in 2007, it would have generated about $1.1 billion.

And since only 2.7 percent of Nevadans reported incomes exceeding $200,000, more than 97 percent of us would have paid ... nothing.

The column freely stipulates that John Ensign's parents might not be as rich as they were in 2007 (the year of my available data). So yeah, if Nevada did by some stretch of the imagination have an income tax, whatever the rate or however it was structured, revenue from that would probably be down, just like revenue from everything else is down around here.

I also review how the constitutional ban on an income tax has mostly stifled analysis in the past, but report why at least the beginnings of a discussion could, possibly, perhaps, conceivably -- gasp! -- happen someday, maybe. And why not? If we're dead set on dismissing the idea out of hand, where's the harm in finding out exactly what it is we're dismissing, no?

Meantime, I didn't get around to directly stating the pretty clear implication of the numbers, i.e., when only 2.7 percent of IRS filings account for more than 35 percent of the state's income, it reflects a stark polarization of wealth. That's not a Nevada-specific phenomenon, of course. Nationally, the gap between rich and poor has been growing wider for decades, accompanied by tax policies that favor the rich.

Fortunately in Nevada, we don't waste time crafting tax policies that favor rich people, preferring instead the simpler and more direct approach of just pretending they don't exist.

Dangerous leftist provocateur fails to appreciate the subtle stylings of America's most forceful leader

Don't these irresponsible liberals understand that they need to to sit quietly and thus validate Harry Reid's assumption that he can take his party's base for granted or they could jeopardize his reelection, and then Nevada won't get a train to Victorville?

For those of you who like to sign such things, there's a petition to Reid:

"Any Democratic senators who support a Republican attempt to block a vote on health care reform should be stripped of their leadership titles. Americans deserve a clean up-or-down vote on health care."

Reid's office has been asked for a reaction. If and when it shows up I'll share it. 

Damned liberals.

UPDATE: A Kos post reminds everyone of the degree to which pseudo-Dems have secured leadership positions in the Senate. In addition to Max Baucus's celebrated and forward-thinking chairmanship of Finance, Kent Conrad chairs Budget, Filthy Joe Lieberman chairs Homeland Security, Blanche Lincoln chairs Agriculture and Mary Landrieu chairs Small Bidness. Also, Bayh, Pryor and Ben Nelson all chair subcommittees.

Former prosecutors somewhat impressed by Ensign's crude venality

The Sun's new guy lays out a breezy and cheery explanation of one of the ways that Sen. John "Hub" Ensign is so totally screwed.

"There’s a good chance there is already an assistant U.S. attorney assigned to this case," says one former prosecutor who worked with the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section.

"I wouldn’t be surprised if they felt in this case there was enough predication for a full investigation. Theoretically, they could be there already," says another.

Good times. And good story.

Cable news curmudgeon wishes NV "scumbag" would go away

Oh, which scumbag? Fair question. Ensign.

Anyway, "Why hasn't Sen. John Ensign resigned?" asks CNN's Jack Cafferty.

...this slime ball senator insists he did nothing wrong here. Senator, it's ALL wrong...

Now the Senate Ethics Committee (which is an oxymoron) has started a preliminary investigation… which, if history is any judge, is meaningless. They won't do anything — they never do when judging one of their own. The whole thing is a joke and shows the impunity with which these arrogant elected scumbags operate.

Slime ball senator? Arrogant elected scumbag? Cafferty must be one of those guys who never asks a question unless he already knows the answer.

*     *    *

Speaking of curmudgeons on TV, if you don't blink while watching this clip from channel 3, you'll see your Gleaner similarly wonder why we still have John Ensign to kick around.

Nevada's program would be especially fair, efficient and adequate

Now that the Congressional Budget Office has completed this week's take-home math assignment, it looks like the Max Baucus Insurance Industry Coddling Act of 2009 could actually get out of the Senate Finance Committee before Obama's second term. Maybe.

The prospect of some tangible movement in turn has prompted countless wildly divergent speculative scenarios about what the Democrats (and, ugh, Lieberman) might do when they finally get a chance to get up on their hind legs and hold forth on the Senate floor. At least one report even went so far as suggest that not all Democratic senators who matter are conservative.

And of particular local interest, perhaps, is a notion whereby instead of a robust, truly competitive national public option, the health care bill would provide for the establishment of state-based public option plans.

What could go wrong with that?

Now, clearly, is no time to raise the mining tax...

...though this would seem to argue otherwise:

Gold powered to a record high on Wednesday, topping the previous day's gains... Spot gold hit a historic $1,048.20 an ounce...

Alas, the mining tax simply can't be raised any time soon. Unlike the sales tax paid by an out-of-work single mother who needs to buy her kid new shoes, taxes on the world's largest multinational mining conglomerates can't be raised without changing the Nevada constitution.

True, state legislators could have eliminated the industry’s oodles of tax loopholes, er, deductions, while milling about in Carson City earlier this year. Had lawmakers done so, the broke, hapless and failed state of Nevada could be getting perhaps as much as four times more money in mining tax revenue than it gets under the insignificant trifle known as Nevada's "net proceeds of minerals" tax.

But Nevada legislators didn't do that. They didn't even try, partly because the mining industry's chief lobbyist in Nevada and the nation, Sen. Harry Reid, told them not to.

So since Nevada politicians refuse to take on the mining industry, Nevada voters will have to do it themselves. As you may have heard, there are people working on a ballot measure to that effect (disclosure: your Gleaner is working with them on an occasional basis).

Oh, and to the industry apologists and lobbyists who inevitably respond to each and every call for an increase in the mining tax by admonishing everyone that Nevada needs to establish a broad-based tax that all businesses pay instead of singling out the mining industry: Why the false choice? Nevada needs to do both.

Dead man literally walking

At about the 1:25 mark, it almost looks like a moment of clarity washes over his traditionally empty noggin' and he realizes that a magic man in the sky didn't really pick him to rule over all the other lowly humans after all.

And to think that until relatively recently his brow had been unsullied by the burden of any significant concern save whether to lay up on the 15th rather than shoot for a green heavily guarded by sand in the front and water in back. Oh well.