Sunday, April 03, 2011


I have reviewed the GOP sixth ward candidate's drop piece.  Never has a candidate held his electorate in such low regard.

He begins by promising to "answer my phone" (a stupefyingly low standard).

But then he moves to this beauty "...our infrastructure (i.e. streets, sidewalks, drainage system) continues to age." 

Never mind that he doesn't know how to punctuate it.  Never mind that infrastructure of any City "continues to age."  Uh, Jimbo, it never gets youngerNo, the real beauty  here is this fellow thinks his neighbors are so terminally stupid, he has to explain to them what "infrastructure" is.

Altogether, a terrific campaign theme: " You're an idiot and I have no respect for you but I'll answer your phone calls and act like I'm interested."



At 8:56 AM, April 04, 2011, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obviously he must be correct as you seemingly have to break it down for the Sixth ward electorate and bring your detailed analysis of the drop piece.

BTW, what does your gal bring to the conference?

At 10:49 AM, April 04, 2011, Blogger UMRBlog said...

I don't live in the 6th. Just saw it last night and was reacting to it.

What does Susan Peters bring to the party? You mean besides a lifetime of public service,teaching critical thinking to young people, devotion to her church, a family heritage of public service and an advance degree from a fine University? Not much. How many of those can Jimbo tick off?

Oh, BTW, your infrastructure has aged another day since I posted the original.

I'm not the one who insulted the good folks in the 6th Ward. I just expressed a little outrage over it.

TYFCB, Nonetheless.

At 11:22 AM, April 04, 2011, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's a little hard to respond to you and not get snarky about your candidate. I mean, you're giving us an old maid running on her family's reputation.

Oh and BTW, if you purport to be a punctuation genius, don't put the comment regarding your spin of Musolino's theme in quotation marks as if he said it. He didn't and you know it. You are simply attributing it to him.

At 11:43 AM, April 04, 2011, Blogger UMRBlog said...

"Old Maid?" Human beings actually still say that? So she shouldn't be elected because she's not married and over 30 or whatever.

It's Ms. Peters who earned her Masters. It's Ms. Peters who taught so many of our children. It's Ms. Peters who has supported the local church her entire lifetime.

I'm sure you have some secret tinfoil hat insight about this but those are all HER credentials and have little to do with her family. Now, if we want to bring families into it, that's OK, too. Some pretty accomplished folk there. but that's me saying that, no her. Obviously, you haven't been following her campaign with any acuity.

BTW, when you impute a theme to someone and make it clear it's an imputation, quotes are permissible.

On the snarky thing, I suspect you find it difficult not to be snarky when you say "good morning."


At 4:55 PM, April 04, 2011, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You forgot to lay down the Catholic card.

The retiring alderman could not answer yes to half of those either, so I guess they really aren't prerequisites to the position.

If usage allows us to take a noun such as impact and convert it into a verb then I gather it is acceptable to use a pair of words 'old maid' and use it as it has been for the last 75 years or longer.

Thanks for the exchange. I must discontinue on this topic as I will end up getting snarky.

At 9:18 PM, April 04, 2011, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Infrastructure that is continually updated does NOT continue to age. Individual elements of the infrastructure age of course, but as elements are maintained and replaced, the infrastructure as a whole stays "young".

But when there is continuous neglect, it "continues to age".

At least that seems a perfectly acceptable interpretation ... "Infrastructure" is a collective whole, not an individual aging sidewalk.

Population aging occurs when the median population is rising. Or would you mock people using that term as well ... "well duh, of course people get older".

It would seem this candidate was not condescending enough to reach all readers?


At 1:08 PM, April 05, 2011, Blogger UMRBlog said...


While I love your spunk, statistically you have earned either an "incorrect" or incomplete.

If you upgrade 51% of your infrastructure every day, then, taken as a whole, it doesn't age. Otherwise it ages.

I guess if you wanted to annualize it and reduce it to days it would look like this: (1/365)*Sigma*.500000000001. But, c'mon. Who does that? Who could afford that?


At 8:42 AM, April 06, 2011, Anonymous Anonymous said...

LOL ... now you're just being silly. An aging population is an understood term. Are you going to argue that all populations are aging unless they replace at least half their population every day?

In any given day infrastructure members might age, but (as with population) you have to consider the median over a longer time period, year over year for example.

I won't try to dredge up my old statistics notes, but while most elements age one month per month, a few repaired or replaced elements can go from 50 years to zero years in that one month. Whether you use a median or an average age, the concept of an "aging infrastructure" is a well founded and often used term for infrastructure not maintained and replaced.

I guess Sue didn't quite make it (my comments are no reflection on her or the other candidate). What are your post game thoughts?


At 8:54 AM, April 06, 2011, Anonymous Anonymous said...


If you want to talk about educated candidates who couldn't get elected look no further than PHD'd John Balotti and Engineer Mark Edward Rees. I guess that in the end the voters were looking for something different...


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home