But you take what is offered.

Lucy Morgan of the St. Petersburg Times continues her coverage of the Taj Mahal courthouse

TALLAHASSEE — Chief Judge Paul M. Hawkes resigned Friday from the top job at the 1st District Court of Appeal, just a few weeks before moving into a new courthouse critics have dubbed the “Taj Mahal” and “Taj MaHawkes.”

Hawkes, 53, who did not resign from the court, would not discuss his reason for resigning as chief judge before his term was up June 30, 2011.

Hawkes offered his resignation at an emergency conference with his fellow judges Friday morning. In a one-sentence letter later in the day, court clerk Jon Wheeler notified the Supreme Court and other district court of appeal judges of the election of Judge Robert T. Benton II to replace Hawkes.
…

Hawkes says the building, nearing completion about six miles east of the Capitol, is dignified and appropriate for a courthouse. He contends state legislators contributed to the escalated costs by requiring that the court build an environmentally friendly structure.
…

He [Hawkes] also has been in a dispute with the Supreme Court over the use of some of the space in the new building. [Supreme Court Chief Justice Charles T.] Canady is exploring using some of the new courthouse to house administrative employees who work for the entire court system and are now housed in rental quarters at a cost of about $287,000 a year.

He’s still a judge, but he did lose the top spot. He is a classic bureaucratic empire builder with an unlimited sense of entitlement. He is also a classic deficit hawk – the little people need to tighten their belts so he can have mahogany paneling and granite counter tops. The crack about “environmentally friendly” is typical because he doesn’t care what the utility bill is, and he certainly doesn’t want to share space with anyone’s “peasants” but his own.

Because you probably don’t really know what it means if you watch the M$M.

Erika Bolstad of McClatchy Newspapers has a nice piece about this: Alaska faces tough road if Congress really cuts earmarks

WASHINGTON — Long the reigning champion of earmarks and never a state to turn down federal money, Alaska may have to change its ways as Congress reconsiders a practice that’s come to symbolize runaway government spending.

House Republicans last week voted on an earmark ban that will take effect when they assume control of the chamber in January. Their Senate Republican counterparts also approved a moratorium — notably without the support of Alaska’s senior senator, Lisa Murkowski.

The Welfare States are in for a bit of shock when they find out that the Feds are not going to be picking up the tab for their stupidity, thanks to the “deficit hawks” and Tea Party minions.

Julia O’Malley’s opinion piece in The Anchorage Daily News gave them fair warning in January.

It was afternoon and I was on my way to a chemistry class. I had stopped for a drink of water when the news came over the speakers in the classrooms.

For those who weren’t alive at the time: remember what you felt on September 11, 2001 for a taste of November 22, 1963. It was a massive change for the worldview of my generation and it marked the beginning of a period of disruption and decline in the civility of American society. Arthur had died and Camelot fell.

At his inauguration John Kennedy made the point: “If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.”

The colors of my world will never be as bright as they were on November 21, 1963.

I see little hope that there will be any change for the better as the current President attempts to return to a time that never existed = the good old days of Reagan.