Sal Pace, like many politicians,

I received another email yesterday from my friend, state Rep. Sal Pace, who, although I’ve never met him, apparently feels familiar enough to keep asking me for money.

I’m not really surprised. I know he hasn’t had much work history, certainly not much outside of government, and right now he’s only employed part-time as a state legislator.

As a matter of fact, I saw him on television recently with an older gentleman looking as though he was learning something about fixing cars. I also saw him picking up trash and mowing a lawn. These are all solid job skills and, although it may be a little late in life, it’s nice to see him trying to pick up a marketable trade.

I guess some of the images were part of an advertising effort for him to get another government job, which is a little disappointing in his quest for work experience. I’m especially worried for him since, from what I’ve seen of his chances in his race for the 3rd Congres-sional District, he would be better off brushing up on some of those other occupational credentials.

He’s a member the Legislature now, but people in Colorado had the good sense to limit how much time people can cling to that paycheck, so I was hopeful that he would break into the private sector to support his needs.

What’s really tragic about that campaign commercial is that, while I saw him doing a bunch of chores that the advertisement indicated were to help his dad around his house, according to Channel 4 News in Denver, the house in the ad he was sprucing up doesn’t belong to his dad.

In fact, Dad had been living in Connecticut until July, when the ad was made, so it was either just a photo op or Sal and his dad are incredibly generous folks who broke into someone’s house to clean the place up.

What adds a bit of comedy to the situation is the ad is entitled, “Visiting Dad.”

This is part of a big push by candidates to seem like plain, hard-working folks. Fundraising emails now seem so chatty, with enigmatic subject lines such as “26,” which I received from Nancy Pelosi yesterday. Or some have a panicky header like the “can you believe it” ones I get from Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, who’s in a much tougher fight with a political newcomer than he had dreamed.

Mostly, these politicians want to seem like defenders of the little guy, if the little guy is an enormous union that contributes to their campaign. Unfortunately they have a hard time seeming like real people because many don’t have much real-world job experience and get pretty jittery at the idea of competing in the private sector.

Many see the ballot as an alternative to an employment application and would much rather have the people who are paying them far away, with constituents only hearing about their exploits through the media. If you’re a Democrat, that’s going to work out pretty well.

Unfortunately for the rest of us, such political animals, if they lose an election, probably aren’t going to have to go get a job operating the business end of a shovel.

Instead, they’ll be rewarded in some administration as deputy to the Secretary of Phone Sanitation Compliance and just hang on until they’re either promoted in the bureaucracy or enough people forget why they lost the last election and they try again.

Remember, this is a world where returning to the private sector means becoming a lobbyist or joining a “not-for-profit” that spends most of its time gulling money out of guilty rich people for politically correct causes.

If you wonder why we have so much regulation, one reason is we have a political class busily coming up with rules for businesses doesn’ even remotely understand. It almost seems a quaint idea now to have candidate who’s had any recent employment not paid with checks signed by a public official.

This election, let’s try to find people who’ve made a little of their own money before they start spending ours and writing rules about how we make it.

Rick Wagner writes more about politics at his blog, The War on Wrong.


COMMENTS

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Page 1 of 1


As usual, familiar Republican apologist Rick Wagner—by focusing on the minutiae of Sal Pace’s recent campaign ads (without mentioning either the pervasive dishonesty of the Romney-Ryan campaigns ads and/or Scott Tipton’s Tea Party voting record), Rick Wagner once again avoids the larger issues facing the electorate this November.

Rather, Paul Didier’s letter (“Signing Taxpayer Protection Pledge verges on sedition”) accurately and aptly castigates the signatories – including Paul Ryan and our own “representative” Scott Tipton – of anti-tax extremist Grover Norquist’s “pledge”.

By subordinating his oath of office to an un-elected self-appointed lobbyist, by disloyally pledging his allegiance to a subversive Tea Party agenda rather than to the Constitution, and by voting accordingly, Tipton has disqualified himself for re-election in the 3d CD.

Moreover, not only is “the pledge” effectively seditious, it is also oxymoronic – because it fails to afford “taxpayer protection” against the mounting burden of our national debt and has had a pernicious delaying effect on bipartisan efforts to confront that issue.

In late 2009, the House passed legislation to create a bipartisan debt commission.  In January 2010, six Republicans sponsoring it in the Senate voted against their own bill – with another abstaining.  On February 18, 2010, President Obama created the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform by executive order.  That “Simpson-Bowles Commission” – which included Paul Ryan – began deliberating in April 2010.

When the Commission announced that it was considering “revenue enhancements” (e.g., “closing loopholes”, “eliminating unneeded subsidies”, and/or “limiting deductions”) in addition to substantial budget cuts, Norquist proclaimed that all such “enhancements” would violate “the pledge” if they raised anyone’s taxes. 

In November 2010, the 111th Congress was elected – buoyed by the mindless “no tax” pledge.  On November 10, 2010, the Commission’s co-chairmen released their debt reduction recommendations.  On December 3, 2010, Ryan and other signatories of “the pledge” irresponsibly voted against them – killing the bipartisan effort.

Ryan then falsely accused President Obama of “walking away” from the Commission’s proposals!  And Ryan and Tipton both voted against the American Jobs Act of 2011!

In fact, Republicans created the $16 trillion national debt and Republican signatories of “the pledge” have been obstructing all efforts to address the problem for two years now.

                Bill Hugenberg

I think both of you need to be knocked off your high horse.  As far as I can tell there is not a dime’s worth of difference between the two parties.  You are both waiting around for some savior to show up and fix your lives.  Why don’t you just do it yourself?  Wouldn’t that be easier?

Page 1 of 1




TOP JOBS
Search More Jobs





THE DAILY SENTINEL
734 S. Seventh St.
Grand Junction, CO 81501
970-242-5050; M-F 8:00 - 5:00
Editions
Subscribe to print edition
E-edition
Advertisers
Advertiser Tearsheet
Information

© 2015 Grand Junction Media, Inc.
By using this site you agree to the Visitor Agreement and the Privacy Policy