Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Wrap yourself in aluminum foil!
Strongest solar storm since 2005 hitting EarthReally cool pic:
By SETH BORENSTEIN | Associated Press
24 Jan 2012
WASHINGTON (AP) — The sun is bombarding Earth with radiation from the biggest solar storm in more than six years with more to come from the fast-moving eruption.
A prediction
... But first, a bit of commentary.
When the GOP field became apparent last summer, I was delighted: Bachmann, Perry, Gingrich, Santorum, Paul, Romney (Herman Cain wasn't yet in the mix then).
THIS is the best the GOP can field???
I've not been disappointed. ... Well, I was sad when Bachmann dropped out.
As the Republican primaries have progressed, everyone has done his very best to run right - pandering to the most conservative element of the GOP electorate.
No one has yet managed more than 50% of GOP voters... 40% is considered a big win.
Turn-out has been low.
Recent general elections have been pretty close to 50-50.
40% of 50% is 20%.
... The leading GOP candidate (whoever it might be this week) is getting 20% of general election votes. This may be how to get the nomination, but it's not much of a strategy for winning the one that counts in November.
... and now, as promised, a prediction: record low GOP turnout in November, and Obama winning by what would - in recent cycles - be considered a landslide - 55%.
[and, yes: as I have in the past, I'll re-visit this prediction to see how well I did.]
When the GOP field became apparent last summer, I was delighted: Bachmann, Perry, Gingrich, Santorum, Paul, Romney (Herman Cain wasn't yet in the mix then).
THIS is the best the GOP can field???
I've not been disappointed. ... Well, I was sad when Bachmann dropped out.
As the Republican primaries have progressed, everyone has done his very best to run right - pandering to the most conservative element of the GOP electorate.
No one has yet managed more than 50% of GOP voters... 40% is considered a big win.
Turn-out has been low.
Recent general elections have been pretty close to 50-50.
40% of 50% is 20%.
... The leading GOP candidate (whoever it might be this week) is getting 20% of general election votes. This may be how to get the nomination, but it's not much of a strategy for winning the one that counts in November.
... and now, as promised, a prediction: record low GOP turnout in November, and Obama winning by what would - in recent cycles - be considered a landslide - 55%.
[and, yes: as I have in the past, I'll re-visit this prediction to see how well I did.]
Monday, January 23, 2012
I'll post the video if I can find it... [update: video now embedded]
A member of the audience at one of Mr. Santorum’s campaign events recently stated,
Here’s a more appropriate reply:
During a similar campaign moment in 2008, Senator McCain had the courage to correct the speaker: No, Obama is not a Muslim.
(... and it was General Colin Powell who provided the follow-up: but even if he were, so what?)
Whatever good will I might have felt for Mr. Santorum was lost in an instant.
Mr. Santorum does not deserve to be President if he can’t stand up for and defend the truth, and defend the Constitution.
“[President Obama] is an avowed Muslim... he has no legal right to be calling himself President.”Rather than addressing the claim, Mr. Santorum promised only that he was doing his best to get Obama out of the White House.
Here’s a more appropriate reply:
“First, President Obama is not a Muslim. He’s a Christian.... but, no: Mr. Santorum let the claim stand, without challenge, without correction.
“But, even if he WERE a Muslim, our Constitution explicitly states that, ‘no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.’
... even if he WERE a Muslim, he would still have every right as a U.S. citizen to be President.
“Finally, I will do my very best to make sure that, with your help, we get him out of the White House.”
During a similar campaign moment in 2008, Senator McCain had the courage to correct the speaker: No, Obama is not a Muslim.
(... and it was General Colin Powell who provided the follow-up: but even if he were, so what?)
Whatever good will I might have felt for Mr. Santorum was lost in an instant.
Mr. Santorum does not deserve to be President if he can’t stand up for and defend the truth, and defend the Constitution.
Friday, January 20, 2012
Uh, Newt: it's about YOU
Uh, Newt... it's not about the liberal media, or President Obama. It's about YOU.
I'm pretty sure if President Obama's second wife came forward to reveal that Barack had asked for an 'open marriage', that would be NEWS.
... oh, wait! - President Obama has had only ONE wife!
Newt: it's not about the elite media, it's not about Barack Obama.
It's about YOU!
I'm pretty sure if President Obama's second wife came forward to reveal that Barack had asked for an 'open marriage', that would be NEWS.
... oh, wait! - President Obama has had only ONE wife!
Newt: it's not about the elite media, it's not about Barack Obama.
It's about YOU!
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Mormonism: you decide
note: I feel sorta bad about this... ya know, going after someone's religion. Religion is personal, a matter of conscience... and the U.S. Constitution does stipulate that "... no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
That said: I had a lot of fun making this video!
That said: I had a lot of fun making this video!
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
LOL
I watched "Hardball with Chris Matthews" last night.
[full disclosure: I DON'T like Chris Matthews!]
One of his guests was Dana Milbank.
[full disclosure: I DON'T like Chris Matthews!]
One of his guests was Dana Milbank.
Matthews: Are we near the end of these debates?I laughed out loud.
Milbank: We're not near the end of the debates, but we ARE near the end of debates that anybody's gonna watch.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Friday, January 13, 2012
a return to feudalism
As far as I can tell, the GOP is advocating a return to feudalism.
Tho' the specifics varied with time and geography, medieval feudalism in broad outline was a system of patronage & protection based on land and products derived from land. At the bottom of the pyramid were serfs (that'd be most of us) - in some cases tied to the land, in others not. They labored to produce sufficient food to pay the lord of the manor 'in kind' taxes, to support the manor. Whatever was left over - frequently very little - was for their own consumption. The lord of the manor derived his income from his serfs, and was expected to pay HIS lord both food and service - providing soldiers and servants. Going up the pyramid we eventually find the senior noble class, who owed fealty to the king, and were in turn taxed to support the kingdom - again in food and service. Those at the bottom had no decision-making role - theirs was a life of drudgery to serve those above... always in imminent danger of starvation, pestilence, and war.
Let me call out just ONE GOP favorite: eliminate tax on capital gains.
So the last $1 earned by the foreman overseeing a road-building project - a project that actually produces a tangible benefit to society - that $1 is taxed at a marginal rate of 25%.
The last $1 earned by the 'investor' in the form of capital gains is currently taxed at 15% - and if the GOP gets its way, it won't be taxed at all.
As it stands, the tax code institutionalizes two economic classes: wage-earners & investors, with wage earners penalized and investors rewarded.
IF the GOP gets is way, that institutionalized stratification will become even more apparent: the investor will pay NO taxes on his income.
This is no longer an INCOME tax - it's a tax on labor... sort of like the feudal serf.
The investor will pay NOTHING to support the system of which he is the beneficiary.
This is an even more extreme form of feudalism than any that has ever existed. In the Middle Ages, even the senior nobility owed SOMETHING to support the kingdom - they didn't get a free ride.
More later...
Tho' the specifics varied with time and geography, medieval feudalism in broad outline was a system of patronage & protection based on land and products derived from land. At the bottom of the pyramid were serfs (that'd be most of us) - in some cases tied to the land, in others not. They labored to produce sufficient food to pay the lord of the manor 'in kind' taxes, to support the manor. Whatever was left over - frequently very little - was for their own consumption. The lord of the manor derived his income from his serfs, and was expected to pay HIS lord both food and service - providing soldiers and servants. Going up the pyramid we eventually find the senior noble class, who owed fealty to the king, and were in turn taxed to support the kingdom - again in food and service. Those at the bottom had no decision-making role - theirs was a life of drudgery to serve those above... always in imminent danger of starvation, pestilence, and war.
Let me call out just ONE GOP favorite: eliminate tax on capital gains.
So the last $1 earned by the foreman overseeing a road-building project - a project that actually produces a tangible benefit to society - that $1 is taxed at a marginal rate of 25%.
The last $1 earned by the 'investor' in the form of capital gains is currently taxed at 15% - and if the GOP gets its way, it won't be taxed at all.
As it stands, the tax code institutionalizes two economic classes: wage-earners & investors, with wage earners penalized and investors rewarded.
IF the GOP gets is way, that institutionalized stratification will become even more apparent: the investor will pay NO taxes on his income.
This is no longer an INCOME tax - it's a tax on labor... sort of like the feudal serf.
The investor will pay NOTHING to support the system of which he is the beneficiary.
This is an even more extreme form of feudalism than any that has ever existed. In the Middle Ages, even the senior nobility owed SOMETHING to support the kingdom - they didn't get a free ride.
More later...
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Who's outta touch???+
Mitt - just to let you know: MOST of us don't have $10K just lying around for a casual bet!
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Thursday, January 5, 2012
"Electability" is over-rated
In 2004 the Dems went for the "electable" candidate - John Kerry... who proceeded to run a completely inept campaign against a vulnerable incumbent.
Better to go with someone who generates enthusiasm... like McGovern in '72.
Better to go with someone who generates enthusiasm... like McGovern in '72.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Spartacus?
I'm searching for the right movie metaphor to explain Newt's campaign moving forward.
Spartacus (Kirk Douglas, Tony Curtis, Peter Ustinov; 1960) seems a plausible choice:
Newt seems to have embarked on this course of action: 'take down Mitt at all costs'. Defeat the legions, then perish with honor. He's got to realize he has no chance at the nomination, so he's just hanging around to bring down Mitt.
Another option: The Great Escape. All-star cast - too many to list (1963).
We'll see if manages exactly this.
Any other nominees?
Spartacus (Kirk Douglas, Tony Curtis, Peter Ustinov; 1960) seems a plausible choice:
The Roman slave, Spartacus, organizes armed up-rising against pre-imperial Rome. He and his followers defeat Roman legions in open battle... then hang around in Italy to be slaughtered - all crucified along the Appian Way.Spartacus knows staying in Italy will lead to disaster, but his followers refuse to escape over the Alps. He resigns himself to 'death with dignity'.
Newt seems to have embarked on this course of action: 'take down Mitt at all costs'. Defeat the legions, then perish with honor. He's got to realize he has no chance at the nomination, so he's just hanging around to bring down Mitt.
Another option: The Great Escape. All-star cast - too many to list (1963).
[senior Allied officer] Ramsey: Roger's idea was to get back at the enemy the hardest way he could, mess up the works. From what we've heard here, I think he did exactly that.... Newt's idea seems to be to get back at Mitt the hardest way he can, mess up the works.
We'll see if manages exactly this.
Any other nominees?
... to the bitter end...
Yep - I stayed up watching Iowa caucus returns.
'Twas fun!
From my perspective, a clear win for Santorum: he came in 2nd by eight (8!) votes.
How much did Romney spend in Iowa? How much did Santorum spend?
I'd guess Santorum got a LOT more bang-for-the-buck!
aside: 'twas also fun watching the broadcast teams on CNN, Fox, and MSNBC getting just a little punch-drunk & slap-happy as the night wore on.
Me? I'm hoping Santorum's Iowa surprise generates LOTS of $$$ for him, that he takes Romney down a few points in New Hampshire, and that the GOP nominating process drags on FOREVER!
'Twas a delight to see Newt pretty much promise that he'll do everything in his power to demolish Mitt. (Mitt's the potential nominee I fear the most...)
If nothing else, the GOP Family Feud oughta give Obama's campaign TONS of great video to use during the general election.
Tonight?... prob'ly a little bit of New Hampshire, and a lot of college football!
'Twas fun!
From my perspective, a clear win for Santorum: he came in 2nd by eight (8!) votes.
How much did Romney spend in Iowa? How much did Santorum spend?
I'd guess Santorum got a LOT more bang-for-the-buck!
aside: 'twas also fun watching the broadcast teams on CNN, Fox, and MSNBC getting just a little punch-drunk & slap-happy as the night wore on.
Me? I'm hoping Santorum's Iowa surprise generates LOTS of $$$ for him, that he takes Romney down a few points in New Hampshire, and that the GOP nominating process drags on FOREVER!
'Twas a delight to see Newt pretty much promise that he'll do everything in his power to demolish Mitt. (Mitt's the potential nominee I fear the most...)
If nothing else, the GOP Family Feud oughta give Obama's campaign TONS of great video to use during the general election.
Tonight?... prob'ly a little bit of New Hampshire, and a lot of college football!
Monday, January 2, 2012
... a VERY incomplete thought...
It occurs to me that it is not often that anyone witnesses - at least via reasonably historical memory - the rise and fall of a geopolitical empire. The Roman Empire took some 500 years to expire - at the end there 'twas no one alive with even vague historical memory of its birth. Yes, one could read Suetonius & Tacitus - but no one could query his grandparents.
In the case of the Soviet Union, this memory is available to us. ... and we have better documentation!
I'm now waiting to read a favorable review in "The New York Review of Books" of a book that adequately takes advantage of this opportunity.
In the case of the Soviet Union, this memory is available to us. ... and we have better documentation!
I'm now waiting to read a favorable review in "The New York Review of Books" of a book that adequately takes advantage of this opportunity.
"This too shall pass."
"This too shall pass" (Persian: این نیز بگذرد, Arabic: كله ماشي, Hebrew: גם זה יעבור, Turkish: Bu da geçer) is a proverb indicating that all material conditions, positive or negative, are temporary. The phrase seems to have originated in the writings of the medieval Persian Sufi poets, and is often attached to a fable of a great king who is humbled by the simple words. Some versions of the fable, beginning with that of Attar of Nishapur, add the detail that the phrase is inscribed on a ring, which therefore has the ability to make the happy man sad and the sad man happy. Jewish folklore often describes Solomon as giving or receiving the phrase. The proverb and associated fable were popular in the first half of the 19th century, appearing in a collection of tales by the English poet Edward Fitzgerald and being employed in a speech by Abraham Lincoln before he became president.Nope - no idea why I'm posting this... somehow seems appropriate.
[This too shall pass]
Happy New Year! - Honest!!!
Best to you & yours in the coming year.
Blah-blah-blah...
I've made a very bad mistake: I've been watching pre-Iowa-caucus coverage on both CNN & FoxNews. At this point I'm left with famous quotation - attributed to both Niels Bohr (Nobel-Prize-winning physicist) and Yogi Berra (NY Yankees catcher):
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future."
Sunday, January 1, 2012
Maybe I should get a hobby...
Explosives Lab Foundhmmm... I'm pretty sure that this 'hobby' would've subjected this nice old gentleman to prosecution under the so-called "Patriot Act".
There were some tense hours after explosives are found at a Torrance County home on Friday.
...
David O'Keeffe passed away two months ago at the age of 81, but no one knew about his own bomb-making lab until Friday. It was in a shed near a house he was renting along Highway 41 in Estancia. When his landlord came to process the property and found the explosives, they called the sheriff.
...
"He was a scientist for the Sandia National Labs, he worked for DuPont, he's had a long history of making explosives legally," said [Torrance County Sheriff, Heath]White.
...
Even though the discovery was a little shocking, Heath says the retired scientist didn't mean any harm. "He was trying to go for some patents on new explosives that he designed, so we believe that he was just still doing what he loved to do."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)