Republicans v. Mitt Romney

The Republican primary race has shaped up as Mitt Romney versus all the rest. The problem with Romney is he is facile, and his only government experience is as Governor of Massachusetts. Any Republican elected in Massachusetts at the time he was, is merely a moderate Democrat anywhere else in the country. The Republican Party, meaning the voters, is looking for any alternative to him. They will vote for him if he wins the nomination, because four more years of Comrade Obama is entirely unacceptable. I don't see a way through to nomination for Governor Romney. He garners support from about 25% of the Party in any poll. When the race finally shakes out to Romney versus one other opponent, he will likely not top 40% of the vote in any primary.

The question then is; who will be the one other opponent? At this juncture it seems that the only two remaining viable candidates are Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich. The further we travel the more apparent it is that Cain is like Obama, in that he does not have the applicable experience, and he is piss ignorant of foreign policy. Which leaves us with Gingrich.

Gingrich has more experience in governing and politics than anyone else in the race, including the President. He understands how government works. He is a conservative in reality, not just for convenience like Gov. Romney. In a race between Gingrich and Romney, Gingrich has the support of the conservatives and particularly the ultra right wing of the Party. When the nomination process began I thought Gingrich would be out of the race by now. Starved of money and lacking a good organization he would have had to withdraw. But he is just now finding his footing and it is the perfect time with the first delegates being won in just over six weeks.

My prediction, on this Veterans' Day, is that on November 7, 2012 we will be saying good morning to President-elect Newt Gingrich.

Greedy liberal bastards

President Obama believes in “an America where everybody gets a fair shake and everybody does their fair share.” Now I know the man is not a Marxist because all my liberal friends have said so, but does this sound any different than the words of Karl Marx, "from each according to his abilities and to each according to his needs?"

Doing your "fair share" in Obamaspeak is certainly not about volunteering or donating to charity, it is about paying more taxes. The class war continues in which the "haves" must sacrifice more for the "have nots." Even though the "haves" (the top 10%) pay in excess of 40% of the taxes already, while the "have nots" (the bottom 50%) pay 2%. But this is unfair. Not unfair to those who are carrying the burden, but to those who are not. Because 40% is just not enough! They must pay more!!!

There is never an explanation of why the current system is unfair, other than that those evil people that earn money are allowed to keep so much of what the government would like to spend and/or redistribute.

Fairness is a stupid approach to taxation. It has nothing to do with funding the government, and nothing to do with economic policy. Fairness is merely an appeal to base human instincts. Our perception of fairness is laced heavily with envy and covetousness. Fair is not necessarily that I will do better, but that you not do X amount better than me. To be fair, we can all be worse off and live in a more fair society.

Fairness doctrine paints earners as greedy for wishing to keep the fruits of their labors, but the confiscators are never called greedy. I would posit that it is greedier to take something that is not yours, than to wish to keep that which you have rightly earned.

America the soft

"The way I think about it is, you know, this is a great, great country that had gotten a little soft and, you know, we didn't have that same competitive edge that we needed over the last couple of decades. We need to get back on track." thus speaks our great Leader, President Barack Hussein Obama.

What does this mean? The country hasn't gone soft. Our leadership has gone soft. The President is the one that has toured the world apologizing for America being the adult on the block. He thinks we should be a pussified nation of beggars holding our hands out to the all being, all knowing government. "Please, smart and wonderful government, feed me, clothe me, make me well. I am unable to fend for myself, without you uber-intelligent genius government types I would perish of my own ignorance."

Please save us from the Progessive agenda of smart people telling us how to live.

Clearly the best way to get back on track is to remove this idiot from office, and anyone else who thinks that we the citizens are to stupid to function without their intervention.

We have grown soft. But we have not grown soft by not competing. We have grown soft by being told that we should not think of ourselves as the one last great hope for mankind. We should not think of ourselves as the shining beacon of hope to all the downtrodden of the world. This is sheer stupidity.

America should be unleashed to be inventive, resourceful, risk taking. These are the things that made America a great nation. Not some ideal of the perfect government ensuring that no citizen ever has a risk in their lives. That is the road to subservience. Risk is the American way to greatness. The federal government has assumed the role of removing all risk, down to a point of zero risk, from our lives. This is not the way of a great people. Without risk there are no mistakes, and without mistakes there is no advancement. We can never learn anything without making mistakes.

A pox on President Obama and all Progressives. May their ideal be recognized for the folly it is and ended soon. America needs to wake up before we truly do become a soft nation of useful idiots.

Smart television anchor

One of the basics of the legal profession is in trial you don't ask a question you don't know the answer to. It seems like that would be a good premise for way too smart news anchors as well. This woman gets caught out.

What does drowning look like?

This seems a basic question, but I certainly didn't know. Please go to "Drowning Doesn't Look Like Drowning" and read.

As we enjoy our summers, and our times in the pool, lake or surf this is a good thing to know.

Drilling

Good for the Obama administration. They have taken a sensible approach to developing our domestic crude resources. The announcement will be made by President Obama and Secretary Salazar. Vast offshore areas will be opened for development. The areas included are the Atlantic coast, new areas of the Gulf and the northern Alaskan Chukchi and Beaufort Seas.

It will be many years before these areas are in production, but this is a step in the right direction to reducing our oil imports.

Free speech, or merely discounted speech?

This peckerwood Koran burning preacher in Florida has created a problem for the ruling political class. Clearly what he did is protected speech under the First Amendment, but they so want to make it illegal because it offends Muslims. Sen. Lindsay Graham compares it to flag burning, which he would also like to make illegal. Both actions may be repugnant, but that is the point isn't it? Free speech is irrelevant if it is only innocuous and inoffensive.

James Allan opines in The Australian:

The only valuable sort of freedom of speech is the sort that allows people to do or to say what others find wrong-headed, offensive, distasteful and intolerant.

Being free to say and do what everyone else wants you to say and do is not a liberty or freedom you will ever have to fight for; it will make little difference to anything . . .

I think any good, well-functioning democracy requires its citizens to man up and grow a thick skin. If you’re offended, tell us why the speaker is wrong. Don’t ask for a court-ordered apology and some two-bit declaration.

That seems about right to me.

Seriously

It seems to me that we are in a time when our country has serious problems. The term crisis is bandied about, and I'm not sure that it is accurate. But we are near a crisis in our economic condition as a people and as a nation.

I see polls where the American people are asked about the biggest problem facing the country, and the economy and jobs rank in the top three always. It is not clear to me why the economy and jobs are decoupled. Unemployment and an ailing economy are the same thing. Without normal employment our economy cannot be considered healthy.

Fortunately the last election, and some of the people elected show a seriousness about addressing our problems. There are, finally, some people in Washington who realize that continued deficit spending will destroy the long-term health of our economy, and, perhaps, cause irreparable harm.

I am still astonished to hear that the solution proposed by some is to spend our way out of the current hole. That makes no sense either logically or economically. I have yet to see a credible economic model that demonstrates that further spending will do anything but make the situation worse.

It is our responsibility to support the adults in Washington in whatever way we can. And, conversely, to tell the children to be quiet and go back to playing with their Legos.

Spending less

It is refreshing to hear the debate in Congress. The whole tone is so different than two years ago. Then the debate was over where to spend and how much. The debate now is where to cut and how much.

The dreaded tea party faction is holding to their principles of reduced federal spending, and this is giving the leadership heartburn. The leadership would like to act as it did when last the Republicans were in control, and mouth platitudes about fiscal responsibility while increasing spending. The freshman Congressmen will not allow it.

Obviously, spending restraint means that constituencies will not get everything that they have in the past. It is good that the feeling is one of sharing the pain. As with compromise; if no one is completely happy with the result, then the outcome is probably good.

I don't want it

I want to make it clear that I am not interested in being Secretary of State. If Sen. John Kerry doesn't want it neither do I.

I really mean it. Do not throw me in that briar patch.

Himalayan glaciers are not melting because of global warming

An article in "The Telegraph" discusses the findings of three researchers. They found that about half of Himalayan glaciers were actually advancing rather than retreating. It seems debris cover is the determining factor in rather the glaciers are growing or shrinking.

Climate is such a complex thing that it seems any prediction of its direction is about as accurate as putting your finger up in the wind.

Social security tax cut

Effective January 1 the employee social security tax has been reduced from 6.2% of salary to 4.2%. This is a decrease of 32%!

I am on board with any decrease in the tax burden.

Vice-President Biden claims this will create jobs because it will put more money in the pocket of the consumer. In my opinion if the cut had applied to the employer share that would have created jobs quicker because it would have been a direct reduction in salary expense. This would have allowed dollars for additional employees.

I'm not sure we should listen to VP Biden though, since he seems to be economically illiterate. Here is a quote from him; "The legislation creating the tax cut requires that any money the payroll tax would have provided to Social Security be replaced by other U.S. general revenue funds, protecting Social Security without an additional burden on taxpayers."

This phrase "without an additional burden on taxpayers" is outrageous. Does he not know that general revenue is raised from taxpayers the same as social security funds, or does he just think the public is so stupid that they don't know when you're picking their pocket in order to give them an allowance.