Mitt Romney Can't Win

TODAY'S ASSOCIATED PRESS STORY BY THOMAS BEAUMONT:  Intensity question for Romney stirs doubt for fall 


MY BLOG ENTRY OF NOVEMBER 18, 2011: Why Mitt Can't Win


I'm not sure what the Republicans can do at this point.  For reasons that will forever be a mystery, genuinely viable, electable Republicans never entered the primaries this year, leaving the field to Romney and the seven dwarfs.  Newt Gingrich? Herman Cain?  Michele Bachmann?  You'd think somebody would have looked at this field and the weakened Barack Obama and literally JUMPED into the race.  Alas, no.


I like the current front runner, former Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania as a person, though I disagree with many of his positions.  I think he is a genuinely good man and it might actually be nice to have a good man as President.  But his far right wing social conservative positions make him unelectable.


So we're left with the consoling fact: President Obama's on-the-job training has been painful, but he is getting the hang of this President thing.  

The Growing Layers of Failure

The irony is so thick here it could be used as mortar to cement bricks.


STORY ONE (via National Public Radio): Kansas City's Failed Schools Leave Students Behind


STORY TWO (via The Blaze): North Carolina Food Police Replaces Nutritious Homemade Lunches with Deep Fried Processed Chicken Nuggets

PHOTO BY TOM BULLOCK OF NPR

The tragedy in Kansas City schools in story ONE above is simply heartbreaking.  The Kansas City failure is a story of a revolving door of administrators, an incompetent school board, middle class flight to private schools and suburban districts, and a teachers union deeply invested in a system that assures failure.  Scott Simon of NPR will continue this series next Saturday and I hope you will all tune in or visit the NPR Website.


I've written often here that Government does absolutely nothing well.  There are some things that only Government can do, the military is the most often mentioned example.  But even then the waste, incompetence, the inefficiencies and corruption is staggering.  


I'm guessing next week, Scott Simon will at least mention the state is considering Charter Schools or even privatizing the entire failed Kansas City School System.  This is exactly what should happen.


Meanwhile, via story TWO above, we have our government taking on another task that it will mismanage completely.  The well meaning North Carolina Legislature wanted to make sure children in the pre-kindergarten program had the proper nutrition to help them prepare for school.  Unfortunately, they only created a bureaucracy of food police following bureaucratic guidelines without even a modicum of logic or intelligence.  


So we have nameless inspectors not allowing children to eat a homemade meat and cheese sandwich on a whole wheat bun with fruit and fruit juice and instead forcing the child to eat in the school cafeteria.  Because the inspector is only "doing his job" he has no idea what the school cafeteria lunch actually is.  His job is to simply inspect the homemade lunch to be certain it has two fruits and vegetables. He doesn't care his actions forced the child to eat deep fried processed chicken nuggets with white bread and milk and ABSOLUTELY NO VEGETABLES!!!.


Somewhere along the line the mission of schools to teach got lost and their new mission is monitor homemade lunches.


As Liberals we should not ever be invested in the process, but only in the results. By definition Liberals should think outside the box, love alternatives and innovation.  We should not be invested in methodology of the past.  We should always strive for new, groundbreaking solutions.  It's time we realized that government is virtually never the solution.


Our goals and dreams must never change, but we must be willing to follow new paths toward achieving those goals.

My Valentine's Gift to You All

Emma Wallace is a treasure.
Delight in her whimsy.
Read her blog.
Buy her CD's.
Wrap yourself in her music.

Til the Thames Freezes Over, Part Three

There is a Vast Left Wing Conspiracy out there determined to PROVE ME RIGHT about everything I've written over the last three days.  I don't like writing about any topic for three days.  Hell, I'd love not to visit this topic ever again.  If only the Church of the Holy Global Warming would let it be.


If any of you didn't read my two previous blog entries, here are direct links:
Til the Thames Freezes Over
Til the Thames Freezes Over, Part Two


For those of you who just want to cut to the chase, my point these last two days is that the Global Warming Zealots (who may or may not be correct in their science and beliefs) will tolerate NO DISAGREEMENT with their orthodoxy.  Just like the early Christian Church, the Afgan Taliban and other tight religious orthodoxies, they persecute, hound and attempt to destroy anyone who dares to disagree with their version of the facts.

Their next victims will be any local television weathermen who might not follow the Global Warming Script to the letter.  Firing will be the minimum punsihment, stoning is not out of the question.


Here's today's latest example, courtesy of Doug Powers over at Michelle Malkin:

Global Warmists Seek to Flush Out ‘Denier’ Meteorologists

The ultimate goal is to clone Al Gore to serve as a weatherman at every local television station so he can offer the patented Hypocrite-Cast® nightly, but that can’t happen if there are still global warming deniers allowed on the air:

The Forecast the Facts campaign — led by 350.org, the League of Conservation Voters and the Citizen Engagement Lab — is pushing for more of a focus on global warming in weather forecasts, and is highlighting the many meteorologists who do not share their beliefs.

“Our goal is nothing short of changing how the entire profession of meteorology tackles the issue of climate change,” the group explains on their website. “We’ll empower everyday people to make sure meteorologists understand that their viewers are counting on them to get this story right, and that those who continue to shirk their professional responsibility will be held accountable.”

According to the Washington Post, the reason for the campaign can be found in a 2010 George Mason University surveys, which found that 63% of television weathermen think that global warming is a product of natural causes, while 31% believe it is from human activity.

So far, the campaign has identified 55 “deniers” in the meteorologist community and are looking for more. They define “deniers” as “anyone who expressly refutes the overwhelming scientific consensus about climate change: that it is real, largely caused by humans, and already having profound impacts on our world.”

This seems incredibly counter-productive, because the more successful they are in adding names to the ever-growing meteorologist denier list, the faster the notion of “scientific consensus” goes out the window.

An additional version of this story is also available on The Daily Caller: Global warming activists seek to purge ‘deniers’ among local weathermen

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/30/global-warming-activists-seek-to-purge-deniers-among-local-weathermen/#ixzz1kzEHOnTq

Til the Thames Freezes Over, Part Two

This will come as a horrible shock to the Global Warming Zealots

and others throughout time who sought to stifle scientific inquiry,

 but the earth is spherical, revolves around the sun

and is not the center of the universe.

Global Warming may be occurring.  After all, it would hardly be the first time in earth's long history that warming has occurred.  Cooling cycled have occurred, too.   What is interesting is that man has almost always coped better with these cycles in the past than we are today.  We've moved north, moved south, planted different crops, hunted different game, stored fuel, changed lifestyles.  And we did it slowly and in perfect rhythm with our wonderful planet.


But not today.  Today, we have turned climate change into a powerful religious orthodoxy, with priests, bishops and even false gods.  And God help you if you cross these powerful servants of the holy writ.


No sooner than yesterday's controversy reared it's ugly head (see my original blog post, yesterday) than we get news of a mini-revolt with the scientific community over the exact same issues.  It's magnificently documented in The Wall Street Journal article quoted below:

No Need to Panic About Global Warming

There's no compelling scientific argument for drastic action

Editor's Note: The following has been signed by the 16 scientists listed at the end of the article: 

In September, Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever, a supporter of President Obama in the last election, publicly resigned from the American Physical Society (APS) with a letter that begins: "I did not renew [my membership] because I cannot live with the [APS policy] statement: 'The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth's physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.' In the APS it is OK to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible?"

In spite of a multidecade international campaign to enforce the message that increasing amounts of the "pollutant" carbon dioxide will destroy civilization, large numbers of scientists, many very prominent, share the opinions of Dr. Giaever. And the number of scientific "heretics" is growing with each passing year. The reason is a collection of stubborn scientific facts.

----- Significant additional data follows ------- Read the entire article for complete information ------

SIGNED: Claude Allegre, former director of the Institute for the Study of the Earth, University of Paris; J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting; Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University; Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society; Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences; William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton; Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT; James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University; Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences; Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne; Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator; Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service; Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva.

Please read the ENTIRE ARTICLE in The Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

The problem is politicization of the scientific community has made discussion and even investigation into climate change nearly impossible.  Anyone who disagrees with the orthodoxy loses their job, is unable to get funding for research and become a pariah in both the scientific and political community.

There is so much we need to do to protect the earth and improve the environment, much of it in perfect harmony with the goals of the Global Warming zealots.  Third world destruction of the vast forests needs to slow or stop.  Pollution in Bejing is fatal for many of its residents.  I could go on and on.

What we should NOT do is stifle scientific investigation or lock away adversaries as the religious zealots did with Galileo so many years ago.

Til The Thames Freezes Over

Years from now the politicization of the Global Warming Debate will be the topic of great books. Not that anybody will read them or pay attention to their lessons. But this last ten years of Global Warming Hysteria will be compared to the religious persecution of Galileo and Copericus.


The problem is that science once again took the back set to power, profit and politics.  Former Vice President Al Gore will likely become the major villain in this low point in advancement of science, as he should well be.  By making science the pawn of politics he has made it impossible for legitimate scientific debate to even happen.  Opponents to the Sacred Scripture of Global Warming lost their jobs, were hounded into silence and had the careers destroyed.  


As evidence mounts that Global Warming IS NOT occurring and, in fact, we are already in a major cooling cycle, climate priests are changing their scripture to read "climate change," perhaps the most stupid acknowledgement of a truth as old as the earth itself.  If one thing has happened over the last 8 million years, the climate has changed..... over and often.


There is much we can, should do, and even must do to improve life on earth for all its peoples and its environment.  False hysteria for political power accomplishes nothing except destroy science itself.


From today's U.K. Daily Mail: 


Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)

• 
  
  Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years
  
  
  The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.
  
  
  The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.
  
  
  
  A painting, dated 1684, by Abraham Hondius depicts one of many 
  frost fairs on the River Thames during the mini ice age
  
  
  Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.
  
  Be SURE to read the entire article (it's quite long and detailed) here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html#ixzz1ktGrC8WD

Bait a Hook

Nothin' like a little fishin' to rest and relax.


Every now and then I need to jump over to my Radio Station hobby and play a little music or put up a music video for you all to enjoy. I certianly hope every one of you listens to WIZARD RADIO. There's a widget over on the upper right side of this blog for easy access.


My only "political" thought for today is that I read virtually all the blogs written by folks who comment here.  And I follow over three hundred fine politically orientated folks on Twitter, both Left and Right.  All too often too many of us jump to quick and occasionally stupid conclusions about our (supposed) opposition.  On Twitter people can get especially mean spirited.  


This video might be a good lesson for us about jumping to conclusions about other people.  I love that old saying... When you ASSUME... you just make an ASS out of U and ME.


Have fun and have a great day!

Blackout

Tragically, SOPA and PIPA are not characters from Grimm's Fairly Tales, although their potential to harm rivals the most evil characters the Grimm Brothers ever imagined.  


In reality SOPA and PIPA are the acronyms for the two bills in the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate designed in Machiavellian fashion by panicked Hollywood moguls to protect their stranglehold on the creative arts.  Their highly paid minions in Congress will claim that SOPA (short for the "Stop Online Piracy Act") and PIPA (short for "Protect Intellectual Property Act") are merely modest efforts to stop copyright infringement committed by foreign web sites.  However, it's not about protecting copyrights at all, it's actually about control, protecting profits and, ultimately, censorship.


SOPA and PIPA are designed in a way that infringes free expression while harming the Internet. Both acts criminalize the act of providing links, the very backbone of the Internet.  Hence, if I link, however innocently, to a site that host stolen copyrighted content (like YouTube, for example), my blog site might be closed down.


Detailed information about these bills can be found in the Stop Online Piracy Act and PROTECT IP Act articles on Wikipedia. 


GovTrack lets you follow both bills through the legislative process: SOPA on this page, and PIPA on this one. 


The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to advocating for the public interest in the digital realm, has summarized why these bills are simply unacceptable in a world that values an open, secure, and free Internet.

Am I Kidding? ....errr, No

The Silly Super Committee Blame Game

Thank God Joe Scarborough gets it, because I swear not one other commentator, left or right, sees the truth of the Super Committee's failure.  For today's politicians, it's all the blame game.




Joe Scarborough said, in part:


“Blaming Grover Norquist for this collapse is the lamest Democratic fiction since the Tonkin Gulf incident [used to justify American intervention in Vietnam]. Like LBJ said a couple of years later, they were shooting at ghosts or whales, and yet that was his excuse to go into Vietnam.


"Grover Norquist, for anybody that works in Washington, D.C., understands that, like a lot of people in Washington, he’s got his own point of view. But Grover holds no magical power over anybody. … He’s not really a powerful guy. His idea may be powerful to conservatives, but he in of himself is not a powerful guy.”


“Democrats have the president of the United States, right? They’ve got the United States Senate — the world’s most deliberative body, the upper chamber. What else do they call them? America’s most exclusive club. They haven’t produced a budget in over 900 days."


"The president of the United States, a Democrat, appoints a commission to take care of the debt. And then he ignores everything that commission says."


"Anybody today trying to blame Grover Norquist or to suggest that Grover Norquist is somehow more powerful than the president of the United States and the United States Senate, which everybody in Washington knows runs Washington. It’s not the House. It is the upper chamber. And the Democrats own it. They are close to a monopoly of Washington, D.C., but to blame this on Grover Norquist is laughable.” 


"This is a straw man to end all straw men.  Grover Norquist has been a straw man. Republicans haven’t even been in charge of the House of Representatives for a year. It’s as if 2009 and 2010 and the massive deficits that were accumulated then didn’t even exist. But, again, I’m blaming both sides today. Both sides have their feet in ideological cement. But Grover Norquist is a straw man."


"These same Democrats that said that George W. Bush abused the powers of office and, ‘Oh, the executive branch had become too powerful,’ are now suggesting Barack Obama, who, by the way, has been completely AWOL on this issue, is powerless? A man who put a debt commission in — he put Simpson/Bowles together and then completely threw them under the bus."


"Mika, you and I, if I ever come back, then I’ll shut up, we have to get Senate Democrats on this program and start asking them exactly why, in the midst of America’s greatest budgetary crisis in 235 years, they have refused, stubbornly, to produce a budget for over 900 days.”


“The president of the United States is still president of the United States. Democrats still control the United States Senate. Grover Norquist’s idea may be a strong one. Grover Norquist has absolutely no power in Washington, D.C. other than the idea he carries. And I am so surprised that Democrats really believe that the presidency is as weak as they believe it is now. That this president couldn’t step forward and show at least a little bit of leadership. He has been AWOL since he and [House Speaker John] Boehner failed on the debt ceiling. He better engage quickly or else we’re going the way of Europe.”


The above is an abridged transcript of Scarborough's comments taken from Jeff Poor's excellent article in The Daily Caller. Read it all here: Scarborough scolds MSNBC colleagues: Stop blaming Grover Norquist

Why Mitt Can't Win

This is a really short post prompted by the new POLL showing the Newt Gringrich is about to pass Mitt Romney even n the "firewall" state of New Hampshire.  Here is the link: Poll: Gingrich, Romney in Dead Heat in N.H. 

Here's Mitt's problem in a nutshell. The Mitt Romney who was the excellent governor of Massachusetts could have won easily. I would certainly have chosen him over Barack Obama and so would many others. He was the perfect Republican, intelligent, thoughtful, compassionate and honest. He could have easily overcome the few issues where he didn't match the far right wing of the Republican Party. 


But that Mitt isn't running. Instead he reinvented himself into the far right wing Romney. His problem is that nobody believes him. Those who appreciated the bravery of the original Romney feel betrayed he has so easily abandoned his principles. And far right conservatives just think he's full of shit. 


His only support comes because the liberal media keeps telling Republicans, desperate for a victory, that Mitt's the only candidate who can beat Obama. But there is no passion there. Hell, there's no there, there. Mitt would go down to defeat in a pattern similar to John McCain. 


Republican's have no enthusiasm for Romney. There will be no grass roots effort. The election will be boring with everyone from both sides staying at home. 


Now, I'm on record saying nobody currently running can beat Obama, so it hardly matters. Newt, Mitt, Herman, Rick... they'll all go down to defeat. 


I've often said that a candidates ability to hold to his principles matter more to me that party or even political positions. With that standard it's not possible for me to vote for Mitt.

Political Correctness is Soooo Much Sweeter Than Actual Freedom

This blog started almost 20 years ago principally to defend freedom of speech and to be certain that the cherished freedoms we have in the real world extends into the internet.  Twenty years later those freedom are still under assault, both in the real world and on the Internet.


But my source of outrage today....  well, not outrage as much as disappointment is an article that appears in Time Magazine's Opinion Section on-line written by Bruce Crumley.  In my constant war to protect free speech I have always counted on virtually all journalists and major publishers as trustworthy allies.  Time Magazine and Mr. Crumley have defected to the other side.

The headline of Mr. Crumley's Op-Ed is Firebombed French Paper Is No Free Speech Martyr You can click on the headline to read the entire article, I'm only going to reprint a small portion below.


 .... The Wednesday morning arson attack destroyed the Paris editorial offices of Charlie Hebdo after the paper published an issue certain to enrage hard-core Islamists .... 


 .... the coarse and heavy-handed Islamist theme of the current edition of Charlie Hebdo. As part of its gag, the paper had re-named itself “Sharia Hebdo”. It also claimed to have invited Mohammed as its guest editor to “celebrate the victory” of the Islamist Ennahda party in Tunisia's first free elections last week. In addition to satirical articles on Islam-themed topics, the paper contains drawings of Mohammed in cartoons featuring Charlie Hebdo's trademark over-the-top (and frequently not “ha-ha funny”) humor. The cover, for example, features a crudely-drawn cartoon of the Prophet saying “100 Whip Lashes If You Don't Die Of Laughter.” Maybe you had to be there when it was first sketched. 


.... free societies have to exercise a minimum of intelligence, calculation, civility and decency in practicing their rights and liberties—and that isn't happening when a newspaper decides to mock an entire faith on the logic that it can claim to make a politically noble statement by gratuitously pissing people off. Defending freedom of expression in the face of oppression is one thing; insisting on the right to be obnoxious and offensive just because you can is infantile. Baiting extremists isn't bravely defiant when your manner of doing so is more significant in offending millions of moderate people as well. And within a climate where violent response—however illegitimate—is a real risk ....


Aside from the all too obvious "let's blame the girl for getting raped because she wore a short dress" theme of his diatribe, the conclusion of Mr. Crumley's essay is that we shouldn't needlessly offend a large portion of the population, especially if you're not very funny.


Mr. Crumley wants to place two limitations on free speech. First you must not needlessly offend a large segment of the population.  This begs the question of how we might determine the need to offend.  If I campaign here in Mississippi against the certain to pass "Right to Life" Amendment 26 I am certain to offend a majority of the population who believes abortion should be banned.  My efforts will be futile, but are they "needless?"


Secondly, Mr Crumley wants the standard to be that the offending speech be really funny, or perhaps of sufficiently high literary quality.  Certainly my writing is of inferior quality and not funny at all. So my campaign for a woman's right to choose fails on both points.


Obviously, in the gospel according to Crumley, I must just shut up.


Fortunately for Bruce Crumley, I strongly disagree with everything he wrote.  Therefore I am able to staunchly defend his right to write an insanely stupid, poorly written, terribly unfunny, horribly offensive article in Time Magazine.  And I will condemn anyone who chooses to firebomb his office or otherwise attack his free speech rights.