Senator Lincoln (D-AR) won the opportunity to lose to Congressman Boozman. I was frankly surprised, because I figured her opponent would capture the support of other candidates and not only had the support of the unions and liberal PAC's behind him, but he did not have a Washington record in what is shaping out to be a year when incumbents are in the political fights of their lives. Lincoln will face the wrath of voters whom rejected Obama by a large margin, carrying the burden of having supported all of his highly unpopular budget-busting and health care agenda. Granted, Boozman is not an outsider, but this is a typical mid-term election where the Dems in power can be expected to lose seats. In particular, "it's the economy, stupid"; the stock market just had a significant correction, and this is a leading (6 month or so) indicator, suggesting a sufficiently strong recovery is not in the cards around election day. If the unemployment rate is still above 9% by early November, Democrats are going to have a tough election. I think this contest is Boozman's to lose.
Sharron Angle (R-NV), the so-called Tea Party-supported candidate, won the right to face Majority Leader Harry Reid this fall. I would have preferred another candidate. Reid is delighted that he's facing Angle. I would say, "Be careful what you wish for--you might get it." Reid is going to inherit all the sins of the Obama Presidency, and Angle is going to run as an outsider. The conventional wisdom is that an incumbent running under 50% approval is in trouble. There is no way Reid will be over 50% by November. I like Angle's chances, but she has to be careful not to let Reid try to redefine her.
It's the year of former lady CEO's as Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina, as expected, captured their party's nominations for governor and US Senate. Present polls show them slightly behind Jerry Brown and Barbara Boxer respectively. But you have 2 political outsiders taking on professional politicians in an anti-incumbent year and where jobs are a key issue. Two former CEO's who know something about how to create jobs? I like their chances this fall.
Shepard Smith: Fox News' Most Irresponsible Anchor
One of the things I ranted about in yesterday's post was the fact that the Obama Administration was not being constructive in terms of dealing with the crisis, trying to politicize things like collateral economic damage (e.g., coastal fishing). What BP CEO Tony Hayward has consistently said is that he would honor LEGITIMATE (i.e., not fraudulent) obligations. Progressive Democrats treat this as some sort of a loophole--perhaps because they haven't been obsessed like conservatives over things like government waste and Medicare and welfare fraud.
The only one from the administration who seems to be handling himself well in this crisis is the crisis czar Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen. In his regular morning briefings, Allen is informative, to the point, and inclusive; he walks the walk of Obama's post-partisanship rhetoric. He doesn't engage in the newest populist sport of BP bashing, second only to Bush bashing. He maintains a professional demeanor and is responsive, little if any political spin. This doesn't mean that I agree with him across the board; yesterday's briefing during which he was asked if there was anything BP should be doing that it isn't already doing, he expressed inappropriate concerns over BP handling of relief claims processing. This showed stunningly bad judgment, an obvious concession to Obama's politically-motivated spin. Maybe it's my having two graduate business degrees, but disbursing checks is a well-defined managerial process. Stopping a spill a mile under the surface of the Gulf, a fairly unique problem, is far more difficult issue; dealing with thousands of barrels of dispersed oil in the Gulf is a difficult issue. Tony Hayward can't simply write a check to stop the leak or cleanse the Gulf; it's an unprecedented technical challenge. As offshore oil consultant Kenneth Arnold notes,
The idea you can wave your arm at this and come to a magical solution is just from someone who doesn't understand the problem. We as a nation are used to instant gratification. There is a problem. We want someone to fix it tomorrow. Things are not always that easy.The fact is, President Obama has done an unacceptable job managing expectations, which is a primary test of leadership.
I criticized Shepard Smith a week ago in this blog. I'm not sure why Fox News is tolerating his nonsense. I don't know why he is personalizing the tragedy, effectively shouting "fire" in a crowded theater; it may have something to do with his constant promotion of Mississippi. If you listen to his reporting, he's openly calling BP and the federal government liars in terms of addressing things like leak rate, stonewalling the disclosure of allegedly leak-related massive subsurface oil plumes, suggesting conspiracy theories regarding BP's lack of cooperation in more accurately estimating leak flow rates (suggesting that BP has a financial incentive to underreport spillage), etc. He is fairly obnoxious with his "I-told-you-so's", his dripping sarcasm (particularly aimed at BP), and his general poor tone, which I regard as highly unprofessional.
There are a few points that I want to make here. First, I am not a shill for BP. I would have handled things a lot differently than Tony Hayward, but I also concede he has industry and managerial experience I don't have. But I'm a problem solver by nature, and I did interdisciplinary research while in academia. I'm more interested in the technical problem than in finger-pointing and scapegoating. The facts are the facts. If there are plumes which can be tied to this leak versus natural or other leaks, BP will be held responsible. If BP departed from industry best practices and that resulted in the tragedy, BP will be held responsible. But, like in the case of most industrial accidents, I don't think for a second believe that BP intentionally caused an accident costing millions of dollars in losses, not to mention tragic loss of life. It's not only Obama Administration micromanagement of company actions, but BP management has to retain or regain the confidence of investors, employees, customers, and vendors.
Second, I don't mind legitimate news stories regardless of where the chips may fall. But my general read is that Smith is specifically cherry-picking sources (e.g., scientists skeptical of current estimates on flow rate) supporting his negative stance against BP, and I've mentioned his unprofessional demeanor and his constant editorializing. There is no real balance here--Smith runs the newscast, and there's no one to counter the constant snide remarks.
Third, I don't like Shepard Smith's alarmism and predominantly negative criticism. Everybody knows that the oil spill potentially affects the coastline and delicate ecosystems, not to mention the obvious tourist and seafood industries. We know that the spill is now partially contained but still continues and that some oil has washed ashore and has affected a small number of birds and turtles. But Shepard Smith is generally providing a one-sided, negative view of the disaster with more emphasis on the glass being half-empty. There is a fatalistic tone that's almost impossible to capture, but roughly paraphrasing, he started rattling off the large dome failure, the top-kill failure, and then pointed out the strategy to even out the ripped pipeline to cap it would actually increase the flow by up to 20% (because the crimped pipe has impeded flow). The general gist is, these guys don't know what they're doing, and the government is approving a policy that will result in even more dumping of oil into the gulf--what are these guys thinking? Smith's rants show anti-intellectualism at its worse. Do you think he would note that have been dozens of deepwater rigs without similar problems? Do you think he would explain why they wanted to shear the ragged edges of the pipeline? If they're now capturing some of the oil, Shepard immediately points out how much is escaping in the gulf--and doesn't bother telling viewers that a bigger cap was being simultaneously developed along with the current cap. A professional TV anchor should not be contributing to the public's existing anxiety over the spill. It can be very irresponsible, potentially contributing to public panic, social unrest, violence, etc. What has been been acutely lacking in Shepard Smith's handling of the disaster is a constructive attitude: lessons learned, steps being taken to mitigate effects on fragile ecosystems, etc.
The 20 Hottest Conservative Women New Media, 2010 Edition Is Out
Sigh. I don't think anyone reads this blog. Certainly not the 20 hottest conservative women. I haven't seen any conservative blog mention my own, although I'm not promoting it at the other websites.
Every once in a while conservative bachelors like me have some hope. After all, Rush Limbaugh is older than me, and he just married a 33-year-old beauty. Yeah, I know: Dan Quayle would probably say, "Ron, I know Rush Limbaugh. He's a supporter of mine. And you're no Rush Limbaugh..."
I guess Megyn Kelly didn't make the list because she's old media (TV). I must live a sheltered life, because I could only recognize Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, and S.E. Cupp, all of whom have appeared on Fox News shows. I think Michelle is married, Ann is dating a progressive, and as for S.E., well, that atheist thing wouldn't go over well with Mom.
I won't even bother auditioning for the top 20 conservative bachelors, unless they have a category for bachelor nobody bloggers least likely to date. I mean, when even liberal women turn you down...
Political Cartoon
Gary Varvel spoofs Obama, whom attended McCartney's recent Gershwin prize appearance, joining himself on stage to help him sing the chorus (along with others) to "Hey, Jude" (after all, he knew all the words: "Na na na na na na na na, hey, Jude"), and McCartney, whom showed his class by dissing Bush behind his back, nearly 18 months out of office. No doubt Obama is trying to remember fonder days when all he needed to win the Presidency was to be a Democrat and have people believing the political hype of an inexperienced politician. McCartney is no doubt remembering those fond days when young people actually listened th the latest records he put out. He's not written a single song in his solo career comparable to the quality hits he penned as a Beatle.
Quote of the Day
Probably my best quality as a coach is that I ask a lot of challenging questions and let the person come up with the answer.
Phil Dixon
Musical Interlude: The AFI Music Top 100 (continued)
#93. "Lose Yourself"
#94. "Ain't Too Proud to Beg"
#95. "(We're Off On the) Road to Morocco"
#96. "Footloose"
