The greatest challenge to any thinker is
stating the problem in a way that will allow a solution.
Bertrand Russell
A Beautiful Sweetheart Victim
of the Aurora, CO Movie Theater Shooting
Is Back to Playing High School Basketball
and Going to Movies
On Hillary Clinton's Leadership Failure:
The Benghazi Scandal
According to The Hill, Clinton accepted responsibility and said the following, leading to Rand Paul's sharp response (below):
But even as she accepted blame for the security lapses in Benghazi, Clinton made an effort to protect her legacy at State — and potentially her chances at a presidential run in 2016 — by denying any wrongdoing herself.
A bipartisan board that investigated the Libya attack “made very clear that the level of responsibility for the failures that they outlined was set at the Assistant Secretary of State level and below,” Clinton said. “These requests don't ordinarily come in to the secretary of State.”She pays lip service to taking responsibility but actually plays a poor imitation of Hogan Heroes' Sgt. Schultz, hiding behind the skirts of a bipartisan investigatory commission. For God's sake, she's an executive; if her underlings were not communicating to her, that's problematic. As a DBA I've had to be proactive and diagnose and fix many (user-defined) "database" problems; in several, if not most, cases they really involved hardware, code, or network issues not under my control. Now Clinton is NOT a DBA (not the point). But for her NOT to know Libya is not a stable place, that there are hostile elements in Libya, that 9/11 is a significant date for hostile forces and not to require an extra degree of precaution is, in my judgment, gross negligence; her #1 responsibility is the safety of Americans (including diplomats) involved. Not getting information from a deputy is a bureaucratic excuse: it was her professional responsibility to exercise due diligence. Is it possible that the ambassador could have been targeted even in a "safe area"? Yes, but it doesn't look like the Administration made safety and prudence a priority, totally unacceptable--and for the Administration try to scapegoat a Youtube video, knowing first of all, the Cairo protest over the video was nonviolent, is utterly pathetic and disingenuous.
This is as nonsensical as the Bush Administration in the aftermath of Katrina, all but oblivious to what was playing out on televisions. Most of us were aware this was a military-style of attack from the circumstances of the late ambassador's death.
The Obama Administration, including Obama and Clinton, knowingly deceived the American people by trying to scapegoat a video--as if they think Americans are unaware that each year since 9/11 of potential attacks on the anniversary by hostile forces. They seem to think because there was a nonviolent protest hours earlier... It's not like America conducted military actions against Libya over the recent past: why not blame a stupid film? It's all those attacks during the Oscars by the critics or viewers, don't you know? The American people are like Mikey of Life Cereal; they'll believe anything.
How did Clinton not know about her ambassador's unauthorized visit to a dangerous part of Libya? That's part of due diligence.
The last thing I want to hear from Clinton is a pale imitation of Bill's "I feel their pain." What difference does it make over how they died? Are you kidding me? And this pathetic women had and/or still has Presidential ambitions?
Santa Monica and Anti-(Fitness) Business Policy
No doubt in sunny Southern California, spectacular Pacific Ocean scenery, warm weather, and fresh air provide a delightful alternative to stuffy, smelly, bland fitness centers. But what happens when you have groups crowding the park?
Faced with fitness crowds, Redondo Beach allows only city-sponsored classes in public parks and beaches. Beverly Hills prohibits groups larger than two from its parks, and the city of Los Angeles charges boot camp operators $60 per hour. But there is talk [in Santa Monica] of a tax of up to 15% on the gross receipts of trainers as well as restricted hours and new rules for equipment use.When I read about Redondo Beach, I have to groan. This is a fairly typical liberal solution: eliminate the private sector alternatives to a government monopoly? Note that several operators comply with the existing permit requirement. Instead of cracking down on unlicensed operators or, say, opening exercise areas to a first-come, first-served/reservation basis or competitive bidding process, never underestimate the ability of government to provide barriers to entry for residents to group-exercise (operators have to pass on their new government costs and restrictions to their clients). Some might argue that government might have an interest in promoting citizen healthy lifestyles rather than taxing and regulating operators out of business.
Rand Nails It in Hillary Clinton Critique: A Preview of 2016?
I'm generally not fond of politicians grandstanding in committee hearings: quite often, these things can be a public flogging. I called for Clinton's termination months ago. I would have also made the point that America had no legitimate self-defense reason for intervening in Libya.
The Johnson-Clinton Exchange on Benghazi
Protectionism and the "Buggy Whip" Speech
Remember all those plants and unions in a state of denial about failing business models. Have you looked at the stock charts of high tech superstar stocks like Microsoft, Intel, HP, and Dell over the past decade? I'm not predicting their demise, but clearly they need to reinvent a growth story in a mature PC industry.
Entertainment Potpourri
American Idol New Season: Thumbs DOWN!
I have muted my criticism of the show during the off season: I welcomed the departure of celebrity singer judges Steven Tyler and Jennifer Lopez. I'm not saying the singer judges were always fawning critics (plus, I would expect well-rehearsed performances over a week between shows not to be disastrous), but it's not immediately clear why singers are better judges, any more than actors in judging movies or performances of other actors. I just don't get from the nature and extent of the judges' comments that these are like judges in, say, gymnastics and diving with scoring on technical factors. We hear trite, predictable feedback or repetitive admonishments about needing to find a distinct performance style and unnecessary references to personal appearance (especially by a singer in his 60's flirting with ladies young enough to be his granddaughter).
I think from the point of scoring, the viewer voting process needs reform: the current process (with multiple votes per viewer allowed) can be more of a popularity contest; and the judges have little relevance after the final cut except for an occasional gimmick like being able to save one eliminated contestant during the season. I would like to see judging widened to include a remote panel of maybe 2-3 dozen experts, including record or musical theater producers, media music critics, choir directors and voice coaches, with some parity between viewer and judge assessment. Quite often we see a viewer sympathy backlash when a judge gives a candid but unpopular assessment.
But the show has, in my opinion, started to go stale. To give an example I was working on the blog during last week's show and this week's and barely watched the screen. Now to understand the following observation, you need to understand American Idol during its earlier runs has had multiple shows in opening weeks to maximize tatings; I did know about last week's kickoff show, which was highly promoted. But I didn't even check to see if there was a second show last week.
And the elimination shows are torturous, mostly filler material, and host Ryan Seacrest is trying 101 ways to swerve results and, as always, cutting to a commercial before announcing the decision. In fact, last year comparable ratings for the premiere were down nearly a quarter, and this year went down another fifth--to the point a CBS drama show the prior evening found more viewers. Reality singing contest fatigue?
To be honest, I'm not favorably impressed by the replacement judges, Mariah Carey, Nicki Minaj and Keith Urban, particularly Minaj. There was a lot of buzz in the hiatus of a rift between Carey and Minaj. They showed a few sparks around the judging of a successful country-style blond contestant. Mariah is probably the most successful female vocalist ever with over 200 million sales and 18 #1 hits. Minaj has released 2 studio albums and has had 2 top 10 hits to date (although she had at one point 7 singles concurrently on the Hot 100, which is impressive). I found the disagreements among the judges to be trivial, annoying, and boring.
AI is still good at telling human interest stories, but it's too predictable. They usually close the show with an upbeat success story, and they had to know the black mother whom brought in her young daughter, an avid Minaj fan, was going to move on, because it would have been cruel to have the little girl there to see her mom fail.
I usually watch the first shows especially to see the train wreck auditions; I haven't seen a good one in a while: some tone-deaf singer in a state of denial about his or her lack of talent.
Musical Interlude: My Favorite Groups
The Cars, "Shake It Up"
