Arm the Schools - Honey Boom Boom

NRA: Just arm the victims

Packing two loads, one in his diapers.

Congratulations "Bronco Bama"!

My Ballot:

[  ] Conservative Romney
[  ] Moderate Romney
[  ] Liberal Romney
[  ] Barack Obama
[  ] Some weird Libertarian

Build Your Own Romney - Website

www.BuildaRomney.com

Sample

Mitt at the final debate:

1. He mostly agrees with Obie without knowing it.
2. Tough-talk that lacked details (a typical pattern for him).
3. He mugged a boy-scout on the way to the debate and stole his pledge book for quotes.
4. Flunked geography.
5. Misses the 80's.

Yes, He Built That

Dirty Hairy
We know his real boss

Mitt's Screwy World Trip

William J. Bennett gets it all wrong trying to defend Mitt Romney's recent overseas trip, in which he offended a wide variety of people and cultures.

"Critics of Romney often patronize him for sounding too scripted and too much like a politician. Now, when he speaks openly and freely, they criticize him for not being enough of a politician or diplomat. They can't have it both ways."

No, you speak "openly and freely" at home about our country, not about other countries and peoples. If it's none of your business, then shut the heck up.

The Penn Bain Way

If Mitt ran USA like Bain, he'd run up debt, charge USA huge "management fees", let it go bankrupt, sell it to China and Saudi Arabia, kick us out of our houses, and then sell our houses to the highest international bidders.

WSJ Internet Invention Spin-Job

On the July 23rd, 2012 print edition of the Wall Street Journal, page A11, L. Gordon Crovitz claims that the Internet is mostly the result of private research and investment, countering Obama's statement about its government roots. Typical of Murdoch products, it's full of half-truths, textual manipulation, and borders on outright lies.

The Internet is a combination of technologies developed over time, and private firms did indeed have a role in its evolution. But the majority of the Internet technology development was directly or indirectly related to government funding from the US and other governments around the world.

The most glaring fault of the article surrounds ARPANET, a military project. Crovitz quotes Robert Taylor, who was part of the ARPANET program of the 70's and 80's. "ARPANET was not an Internet. An Internet is a connection between two or more computers", Taylor allegedly stated. While technically true perhaps, it misses the point of ARPANET's role in history. ARPANET pioneered the use of "packet switching" to send data packets in partitioned chunks with routing and ID info in order to be "reassembled" on the receiving end.

This differed from the old way of having direct lines of communication for the bits. Chunk-ifying the data gives more flexibility to work around high-traffic and defective spots on a network. It's almost comparable to using trucks versus trains. While trains are good at high-volume transport between a few fixed points, they are not flexible if you have many different destinations. (Data terminals, which are a kind of remote computer monitor, were one early use of ARPANET.)

Whether or not this "is" the Internet is secondary to the fact that the Internet is heavily based on packet switching. Murdoch's, I mean Crovitz's complaint is almost like saying early rockets didn't matter in the history of rockets because they "never reached space". His reason for dismissing it is very weak. Packet switching is arguably the most important part of the Internet technologies. Ethernet (below) had decent alternatives, but packet switching was new and unique. It's not the standard that stands out, it's the technique itself.

The article correctly points out that Ethernet, another part of Internet technology, was developed at Xerox, the private copier corporation. However, it was inspired by ALOHAnet, which came from the public University of Hawaii. (It seems building time-travel devices to forge Hawaiian birth certificates takes cutting-edge technologies.)

Crovitz's other Xerox references relating to graphical interfaces and early PC's are mostly tangential to the Internet, but still misleading regardless. For example, he failed to credit university research on Ivan Sutherland's "light pen" based graphical user interface work, and Douglas Engelbart's invention of the mouse at Stanford. Stanford was also instrumental in testing and developing hypertext.

Much of early graphical interface research was motivated by military command and control centers, which wanted faster ways to visualize and select ("point to") various radar targets on the screen. The Air Force SAGE system is an early example.

Many of the World Wide Web protocols and language techniques were developed as part of CERN, The European Organization for Nuclear Research, a government organization.

Here is a copy of the very first web-page:

http://www.w3.org/History/19921103-hypertext/hypertext/WWW/TheProject.html

The Internet and the World Wide Web are technically two different things, actually; but in practice most consider them closely related. Further, the Australian government under CSIRO developed some key parts of WiFi technology that we commonly use in our homes to allow multiple devices to connect to the internet.

Eventually the Internet was commercialized as Crovitz points out, but that's irrelevant to Obama's comments about its origin. If big business had it its way, the we'd still be using the slow, proprietary, and expensive network services such as Prodigy, CompuServe, and America Online that popped onto the scene around the early 1990's. They were much more profitable than the Internet because corporations controlled distribution and content and were happy to milk customers.

However, college kids playing around with the early Internet and Web services sponsored by universities realized the potential of a more open alternative capable of sharing info across different computer brands and networks.

Fix Mitt Voters

The Estonia Austerity Myth

Many conservatives began holding Estonia as evidence that austerity works because of Estonia's recent success after cutting back government programs.

However, there are at least two problems with using Estonia as an austerity success case. First is that they went into the recession with a surplus. Dubya spent the USA's surplus and safety margin (while the pre-Tea-Party sat quietly).

Second, they are a small nation such that they can play a similar role as the Cayman Islands (where Mitt hides his profits) as far as tax havens for big companies. This doesn't work in a large nation because the benefits of being a tax haven are too small relative to the population.

I've seen no evidence that austerity works on medium and large nations. The few examples sometimes used are cases where the cut-backs happened before or after a world-wide recession, not during, and are thus not comparable.

Regulation and Consequences

A relative recently sent me a snippet from a radio show (rhymes with Tarm Song and Smetty) in which they promote the idea that the "free market" can replace most government regulation via organizations like Consumer Reports and web-based consumer rating agencies.

The argument that private consumer organizations can get sued if they screw up is questionable. If they fail to detect bacteria in milk and millions get sick, for example, are they liable? Most likely there will be a tiny disclaimer at the bottom of their legal statement that limits their legal risk.

Further, it would be expensive for consumer reports etc. to inspect every milk factory. Currently they only test one or a few product samples overall for their reviews. Also note that dairies pay inspection fees to the government; it generally doesn't come out of citizen's pockets as income taxes; although may increase the price of the milk itself as companies pass on the fees in their price.

I've never heard a consumer service perform such a service at a large scale. It may make for an interesting experiment, but please try it on something less risky than food first. I'm all for testing new ideas, but don't start out with the Big Kahuna.

As far as financial rating agencies, many existing agencies gave the banks who were purchasing suspect home mortgages high marks before the mortgage melt-down. Here's a quote from an article related to Moody's mortgage-related ratings:

CEO Raymond McDaniel said in written remarks released ahead of his testimony that he was "deeply disappointed" by the performance of the credit ratings issued by Moody's for complex bonds called mortgage-backed securities.

"Moody's is certainly not satisfied with the performance of [our] ratings. Indeed, over the past few years, there has been an intense level of self evaluation within the organization," said McDaniel, the CEO and chairman of a once proud company that has seen its share value slide down with its reputation.

Source: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/06/02/95197/moodys-executives-offer-regret.html

Another example given of alleged excess regulation is "regular" restaurants banning hot-dog stands selling meals near themselves because they don't want the competition. That may be a case of crony capitalism. Restaurants may be influencing local officials to keep hotdog stands out of their area. If you have a way to fix crony capitalism, I'm all ears. Voters typically don't look into those details close enough unless they "blow up" in the press; and the vast majority of the details don't.

You might say, "just don't have ANY regulations about where people can sell food, then the crony capitalists (such as fixed-location restaurants) can't bribe away competition." However, there are likely many unintended consequences of such an over-arching law.

For example, traffic congestion near high-traffic hotdog vendors or already-full streets. Most new brick-and-mortar businesses are required to demonstrate they have sufficient parking facilities so that cars don't spill over into other areas. (And I've witnessed the annoying problems when they guess wrong.) Or what if hot-dog grease ends up being dumped all over the pavement with no trace of who dumped it, causing skids, slips, and deaths.

And if a fly-by-night push-cart stand poisons you and your children with bad meat, you may not even be able to find the company or owner to sue. You can't sue somebody you can't find. It's harder for a brick building renter to skip town. (It's also hard to sue if you are dead.)

Again, I'm all for testing ideas, but the result is not likely to be what conservatives think they will be. They live in an idealistic dream-world. Many a town have passed zoning laws as a result of organizations abusing the system. Yes, some such laws and regulations are stupid and worthy of ridicule. But that's not a reason to toss all laws.

If 10% are bad, does that mean we should toss 100%? That's not rational. Fox News and Friends will keep emphasizing the 10% silly laws in an effort to rid all because the plutocrats pay them to say that. They cherry-pick their evidence and scenarios to paint an unbalanced picture of regulation. You don't hear about the majority of good regulations.

In the program, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is allegedly withholding useful new medications because they are a "slow and bureaucratic" organization. I've heard complaints both ways regarding when to approve the drugs. There have been medications that were allegedly released too early, such as Vioxx, which resulted in potential injury and death. Weighing the risk is a delicate balance.

Some want individuals to be able to accept the risks themselves; to purchase whatever risky product or service they wish. However, society may just end up taking care of people who screw themselves up, becoming lame zombies, creating higher insurance rates for us all; and a society perhaps too crippled or hobbled to work.

Many conservatives want Social Darwinism where those who make consumption mistakes are just left to die in the street and as a society we just leave their corpses there to rot as punishment for their mistakes. (Maybe that's what they'll make the hotdogs out of.) However, that's not the kind of society I personally want and I won't vote for that. It would also create a spreading sociopathic moral rot.

I doubt it would be economically efficient either because people on average would waste all their resources recovering from preventable mistakes. We'd be both an economic dead zone and a bunch of twisted sociopaths that nobody would want to be associated with.

Before the FDA was formed, a company once sold a successful weight loss pill. It turned out the pills had tape-worm spores in them.

(See also our 5/3/2010 article on regulation & efficiency)

Mittenomics: Trickle-Down Works!

"I'll Have Beagle on a Bagel, Please"

"I'll have Beagle on a Bagel, please."

Bush's Screw-Ups, Reminder

For you conservatives who are suffering from Bush Amnesia, here's a reminder of Bush's fumbles, foibles, and blunders:

• Exaggerating case for war.
• Exaggerating ties between Iraq and Al-Qaeda.
• Lying about "only going to war as last resort".
• Stirring up an international "hate race" with polarizing slogans normally only found in dark comic books.
• Commuting Libby's jail sentence despite being found guilty.
• Violating Geneva conventions on torture.
• Pushing to legalize torture.
• Attempting to abandon habeas Corpus.
• Blaming B. Clinton for financial crisis despite having 8 years to undo any Clinton-era rules he didn't like and hyping the hell out of deregulation.
• Running up huge budget during non-recession.
• Running up the trade deficit.
• Pushing unchecked spying on citizens.
• Allowing no-bid contracts for Iraq contractors.
• Appointing unqualified buddies and unqualified political kiss-ups to key posts; FEMA and DOJ appointees being the most notable.
• Praising and giving medals to administrators who screwed up; "Good Job Brownie" being the most notable, but also giving Medal of Freedom to "slam dunk" Tenet and Bremer.
• Sitting on his ass after being notified of the 2nd plane hitting the tower.
• Letting Bin Laden slip from Torah Borah by under-manning the project.
• Letting private security contractors run amuck in Iraq.
• Trying to let dangerous nations manage our ports.
• Underfunding port security.
• Pushing excessive environmental and safety deregulation.
• Failure to keep negotiating Kyoto protocol.
• Gutted FBI financial probes to focus on "terrism" without giving them new funds.
• Pressuring science community to dilute global warming research.
• Touching world leaders in strange ways.
• Torturing the English language.
• Running the wars poorly. (Even John McCain agreed on this.)
• Strumming guitar and letting Condie go shoe-shopping while N.O. was taking the Mother of All Baths.
• Putting his buddy horse trainer in charge of disaster recovery. 
• Tying foreign aide to ineffective "abstinence" programs due to religious beliefs instead of logic.
• Wanting to teach Creationism in schools despite zero field evidence.
• Approving a new Iraqi flag that looked like Israel's.
• Cutting stem-cell and cancer research.
• Underestimating cost of war.
• Keeping the war "off budget"
• Planting gov't operatives to pose as journalists.
• Downplayed relationship with Ken Lay.
• Insulting Europeans with his "elitist" comments.
• Forbidding states from making tougher emission standards than feds.
• Kissing Saudi princes
• Tried to get burger-flipping re-classified as "manufacturing" to jack up the numbers.
• The "Freedom Car" - Used hydrogen cars as a stalling tactic instead of real change.
• Underfunded his Mars ship
• Puked on Japanese Priminister
• Got "doored" by Chinese
• "Not worried" about Bin Laden comment
• Gave excessive tax breaks to oil co's 
• Dismissed 7 U.S. Attorneys for their political beliefs
• Walter Reed neglect
• Misplaced Billions in cash in Iraq 
• "Catapulting the propaganda" phrase

Preview: Romney and Obama Debate on Healthcare

Similar to what we did last year, here's a simulation of a healthcare debate between the president and Mitt Romney:

Mitt: Obamacare is expensive, unpopular, and unconstitutional; and as president I will kill it!

Obama: Your Massachusetts version of the program is supported by almost two-thirds of the state of Massachusetts (MA).

Mitt: MA's program is different than Obamacare.

Obama: If you could identify the differences that would improve it, I'd gladly consider adjustments. I never said I was against tuning it to improve it. Instead, you and the GOP just want to kill it outright.

Mitt: It was a program designed to fit MA and MA's special needs. It was not intended to be a national solution. [Actually, he once claimed it was, but we'll put that aside for now.]

Obama: How specifically are the people of MA significantly different than the nation?

Mitt: Uhhhh.....um... It's unconstitutional!

Obama: I didn't ask about constitutionality.

Mitt: If it's unconstitutional, then the opinions of the people of MA don't matter.

Obama: You are avoiding the question.

Mitt: No, I'm just stating the reality of the situation.

Obama: I disagree that it's unconstitutional, and the nation and MA deserve a reply on the MA question. Healthcare is an important topic.

Mitt: Ask them, not me.

Obama: I guess asking you was indeed a mistake.

Strange Man Outside, Should I Shoot Him?

Hmmm, what would Zimmerman do?

Zimmerman started the Neighborhood Botch Program.

Zimmerman probably won't go to jail, but he's still an idiot. So are the cops who mishandled the case. It's not always a crime to be an idiot. I hope at least a civil judgement can succeed against Zimmerman.

Update on the GOP Race (Chart):

Solyndra, Oil, and Apollo Moon Landings

Moving away from fossil fuels is AT LEAST as important as Apollo was. If Solyndra is the Apollo 1 fire of our day (killing 3 astronauts), so be it! You don't solve big problems without taking risks.

It's about both the environment and the problems caused by funneling money to unfriendly countries and peoples in the Middle East. Third, the supply of oil may dwindle soon as we suck the planet dry.