My Photo

Sponsor

Availability on NewsTex



  • This blog is now syndicated through Newstex's revolutionary "Blogs-on-Demand" product, which delivers premium full-text blog content to its web and media customers, including LexisNexis, CanWest, and EBSCO.

Availability on BlogBurst


  • BlogBurst.com

  • This blog is a member of BlogBurst, a syndication service that makes premium blog content available to major publishers like Reuters, Internet Broadcasting (WNBC, WMUR, etc.), USA Today, Fox News, The Washington Post, The Houston Chronicle, and many more. I am proud to announce that this blog made BlogBurst's leaderboard for the first quarter of 2007 (that means it ranked in the top 100 for the quarter, out of the more than 3500 member blogs -- with over 1,000,000 post headline displays and over 1000 full post views on Reuters alone). My spinoff blog, Political CommenTerry, is a member of the BlogBurst network as well. See the link below to Political CommenTerry, the ultimate authority on U.S. politics!
  • Political CommenTerry

BlogCritics Contributor


  • Blogcritics: news and reviews

May 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Blog powered by TypePad

« February 2008 | Main | April 2008 »

March 21, 2008

Random Rants and Raves #126

What's the difference between doing a Schedule A and a Schedule B? A Schedule A allows you to list all of your itemized deductions; a Schedule B forces you to add stuff back in. In other words, Schedule A giveth and Schedule B taketh away.            


Those who have money don't need pedigrees or credentials. Their money is their pedigree and credential. 


Censorship is an abomination to any free people.


I hate cameras because they constantly show me how I really look.


Never rule out any possibility -- especially something bad.  


I have now eliminated UNICEF from the list of charitable organizations that I will consider supporting. Why? Because it is now pressuring Japan to abandon its common sense approach to fighting child pornography in favor of the heavy-handed, thought-police-style tactics that the U.S. and other less-libertarian countries employ.


People or things with the most potential often turn out to be the biggest flops.   


If I ever won a lottery, one of the first things I would do is sit down and brainstorm various ways to avoid losing the money.

March 20, 2008

Why Tim Kaine Won’t Be a Vice-Presidential Candidate

There has been much speculation lately about the possibility of Virginia Governor Tim Kaine being the Democratic vice-presidential nominee. He has been a strong supporter of Barack Obama. Therefore many pundits feel that Obama, should he win the Democratic presidential nomination, might select Kaine as the number two man on the ticket. To those who think this is possible, I say: Forget about it – it’s not going to happen.

How can I be so sure? Well, there’s one little problem that’s going to keep Kaine off the Democratic national ticket. His name is Bill Bolling. Bolling is Virginia’s lieutenant governor – and he is a Republican. Should Kaine be selected to run for vice president and win, Bolling would become Virginia’s governor. Both major parties are reluctant to turn governorships over to the other party. No party’s national organization wants to be blamed by any of its state organizations for handing over that state’s governor’s mansion to the other party. Therefore, while Kaine might be a tantalizing source of vice-presidential speculation, he will not ultimately be selected.

March 19, 2008

Four Reasons Why America Is Not Libertarian Enough

The United States of America is the freest nation on earth and I am very proud to be an American. However, we still have plenty of room for improvement. One area in which we can use quite a bit of improvement is our lack of libertarianism. Sadly, we are just not libertarian enough as a society. I believe there are four major reasons for this condition. Hopefully, we will eventually be able to overcome all of them. 

First, too many U.S. citizens allow their emotions to override their common sense. As a nation, we are very intelligent, but we often allow that intelligence to be overcome by fear, anger, outrage, and other such feelings. We allow nuts on both sides of the political spectrum to influence us into taking partisan positions on seeming all matters, even when it makes no sense to do so. At times, the U.S. seems to be bastion of irrational thought. We dream up imaginary enemies, both foreign and domestic. We are far too superstitious and often believe silly conspiracy theories. We overreact to minor problems. We often punish people harshly for trivial or inconsequential infractions, just because we are so put off by what they may have done. We are too quick to fight wars because of our fear of mushroom clouds that don’t exist. We worry about when the President’s “red” phone is going to ring. We are conned into giving up our freedom in return for added security that we don’t really need. We concern ourselves over hobgoblins and bogymen of our own creation. We must learn to instead allow reason and logic to be our guide.

Second, many of us seem to think it’s the government’s duty to legislate morality. This would be true only in a theocracy. We have a republican (with a little ‘r’) form of government, not a theocracy. In a republic, the government should encourage morality and discourage immorality, but should not attempt to legislate either. Attempts to legislate morality, i.e., outlawing victimless “crimes” and behavior that does not directly hurt anyone, do not make us any more moral and only put us on a slippery slope toward the further erosion of our freedom. We need to tell the government to quit intruding in our private lives.

Third, too many Americans are perfectly comfortable with a government nanny state that treats adults like children. We seem to have no problem at all with the government telling us we must wear seatbelts and motorcycle helmets and that private restaurant and bar owners must prohibit smoking. What we don’t realize is that we are giving up our precious freedoms by allowing such government regulations. When we allow the government to impose these things on us, it’ll soon be imposing other restrictions on our lives. When I entered college, I remember being pleasantly surprised at the difference between high school and college. There were no hall monitors at my college and no one to tell me when I had to attend class. We were treated like adults, so we acted like adults. In high school, on the other hand, we were treated like children, so we acted like children. We Americans should tell the government that we want to be treated like adults and don’t need it to play the role of our parents.

Fourth, we seem to be all too willing to take away the freedom and rights of adults to protect children from even the remotest and most unlikely kind of harm. Our government, with assistance from the endless number of so-called child advocacy groups, then takes advantage of this sentiment by imposing all kinds of restrictions on what adults can and cannot do. We’ve all heard people say they are doing this “for the children.” Baloney! In most cases, it’s just an excuse to allow a vocal minority to impose its will on the majority. What we need to realize is that it is impossible to protect children from all possible injury. While we need to do our best to protect them from all direct and imminent threats, we must understand that the risk of some harm to them will always be present, no matter what we do. If allowing adults to have more freedom creates some negligible increase in indirect harm to children, then so be it.

March 18, 2008

Clinton's Michigan and Florida Hypocrisy

Suppose that the Dallas Cowboys play the Houston Texans in an exhibition game next August and the Texans win. Then suppose that the Texans subsequently appeal to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to have the game counted in the regular season standings. How fair would that be? Of course, it wouldn’t be fair at all as the Cowboys would rightly argue that, had they known the game was going to count, they would have put more resources into it and tried a lot harder to win it.

As we all should know, it’s not fair to change the rules after the fact, but that’s exactly what Hillary Clinton is arguing to have done. It’s no different than what the Houston Texans would be arguing for in my supposition above. Last August, the Democratic National Committee decided to strip Michigan and Florida of all of their convention delegates because they scheduled their primaries before February 5 (a date that only Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina were allowed to precede). That reduced Michigan’s and Florida’s primaries to mere beauty contests (that’s what exhibition games in politics are called). 

When that decision was made, every contender for the Democratic presidential nomination, including Clinton, agreed to it. Not one word of dissent was heard from any of them. Clinton (or any of the rest of them) could very easily have stood up at that time and argued that it wasn’t right to deny those two states a voice in the nominating process – but none of them did. Now that she has won both of those primaries, she is arguing that they should count and that delegates from those states should be seated at the convention, based on the results of those primaries. Barack Obama, on the other hand, rightly argues that, had he known their primaries were going to count, he would have campaigned and run radio and TV ads in both of those states. As it turned out, he did none of that and didn’t even have his name on the ballot in Michigan.   

But why did Clinton wait until the last month or so to start arguing the unfairness of not giving these states a voice in the nominating process when we never heard a peep out of her last August? I think it was because, last August, she didn’t believe those states were going to matter. She believed that she was going to steamroll to the nomination in such a way that not counting those states would be totally inconsequential to the nominating process. So, at that time, she didn’t feel that it was worth rocking the boat to speak up. Why, in her mind, should she risk ruffling the feathers of the Democratic National Committee, when she could just sit back and cruise to the nomination? That’s what she thought. But, like I’ve often been told, that‘s what you get for thinking.

Once she realized that the race for Democratic presidential nomination was developing into a neck-and-neck contest between herself and Obama, she quickly got religion and began to see the unfairness of stripping Michigan and Florida of their delegates. Actually, of course, she began to realize that she had no chance of winning the nomination without them – thus the conversion. However, it’s too late the change the rules now. The best she can hope for now is the so-called “do-over” of Michigan's primary. Even that would constitute a change in the rules. Florida's Democratic Party has recently ruled out such a scenario there.

March 17, 2008

It’s Time for a New Pro Basketball League

I think it’s about time for a new professional basketball league to compete with the NBA. Unlike the case with pro football and baseball, in which nearly all of the major markets have been tapped, there are plenty of unutilized markets for basketball. Below is a list of locations that I believe would make a new basketball league viable and competitive:

Pittsburgh
Montreal
Buffalo
New York City (could handle a second franchise as it does in baseball)
Baltimore
Norfolk, VA
Raleigh/Durham
Tampa/St. Petersburg
Jacksonville
Louisville
Nashville
Cincinnati
Columbus, OH
St. Louis
Kansas City
Omaha
Austin
Las Vegas
Tucson
Anaheim
San Jose
San Diego
Seattle (assuming the Supersonics move to Oklahoma City)
Vancouver

That would be 24 potential franchises in big cities from coast to coast. The league would not have to compete to with NBA salaries right away but could work up to it by starting out with salaries big enough to keep guys cut from NBA rosters from going to Europe to play. After a season or two and (hopefully) with a TV contract in place, they could start paying NBA salaries to one or two players per franchise and go from there.

March 16, 2008

Shouldn't Separation of Church and State Work Both Ways?

Any time someone tries introduce even the slightest amount of religion into any government-sponsored institution, the ACLU and other liberal anti-religious groups will scream bloody murder. They will cite the imaginary wall that they believe the U.S. Constitution has built between church and state. They call it separation of church and state. But apparently, in their minds, it only works one way, i.e., it protects the state from the church, but it doesn't protect the church from the state.

A couple of year ago, the Virginia legislature considered a law that would have required pastors to notify social services of suspected child abuse. Why should the state get away with forcing a pastor do anything just because he or she is pastor? Yet I never heard a single peep out of any the groups that are always so worried about separation of church and state. I think it's high time the whole separation of church and state argument starts working both ways. Turnabout is fair play.

March 15, 2008

Just a Concept?

Several months back, a guy who authors a popular television technology website posted an article that referred to the fallacious 500-channel universe. As I have stated in some previous posts, there are no cable or satellite systems in the U.S. (that I know of) which will currently allow their customers to subscribe to 500 or more channels. Yet people, including the guy I am referring to, talk about the 500 channel universe as if it has been a reality for over 15 years.

Anyway, I emailed him and challenged his 500-channel assertion. He promptly and sarcastically replied back that everyone knows the reference to 500 channels is "just a concept." Everyone but me, it seems.

I wonder what would happen if we applied this same kind of logic to other things. Let's suppose a company was opening up a new factory in your town and was placing help-wanted ads with salaries advertised as $1000 per week. Then suppose their new-hires took a look at their pay stubs after their first week of work and discovered that they had each received only $700 in gross pay for that week. If their boss explained this discrepancy by saying, "Come on folks, the $1000 a week thing is just a concept", do you think those workers would accept that as a valid answer?

March 14, 2008

The Democratic Presidential Race: A Status Report

It looks like Barack Obama has recovered most of the momentum he lost on March 4, when Hillary Clinton broke his winning streak by scoring primary wins in Ohio, Texas, and Rhode Island. Since then, Obama has been declared the winner in the Texas Caucuses and actually ended up being awarded more delegates from that state than was Clinton. Therefore, what appeared to be major victories for Clinton in the March 4 contests only netted her about six more delegates than Obama. Obama’s subsequent wins in Wyoming and Mississippi netted him seven more delegates than she, meaning that he now leads in total delegates by 124 – one more than he lead by on March 3.

In addition, Clinton had pulled ahead of Obama in the national polls just as she was getting her big wins on March 4. However, that lead only lasted about five days, as Obama was able to pull back ahead of her, even before his resounding victory in Mississippi. His lead in the national polls is now about what is was at the end of February. Most of the professional pundits didn’t seem to notice this – or at least I’ve never heard any of them point it out.

We have just entered what’s going to be a six-week break in the nominating process. The next contest will be the largest remaining (scheduled) prize, Pennsylvania on April 22. However, other states like North Carolina, Indiana, and Oregon, which conduct their primaries in May, also offer plenty of delegates. I believe Clinton will focus mainly on Pennsylvania, while Obama will attempt to hedge his bet by campaigning in all the remaining states.

Clinton’s laser-focused strategy has already hurt her once during this campaign. She concentrated so much on Super Tuesday that she didn’t have a plan for the states that immediately followed it – and lost all of them. That allowed Obama to run off twelve wins in row and build his lead in the delegate race. I could see a similar scenario occurring again after the Pennsylvania Primary. Such a scenario (or even something remotely close to it) would allow Obama to more than erase any gains Clinton would make by winning Pennsylvania.

Of course, the one remaining wildcard in this race is what will happen to the delegates from Michigan and Florida. It is not likely that the Democratic National Committee will reverse its course and allow their earlier primaries to count. What’s more likely are so-called “do-over” primaries conducted in those states in May or June. They would probably be done by mail-in ballot. If this turns out to be the case, Clinton would be a heavy favorite in both states. However, by that time, she might be so far behind in the delegate count that wins both states still wouldn’t bring her to within 100 delegates of Obama. At that point, it would be unlikely that the super delegates would be convinced to come over to her side.

March 13, 2008

Classic Rants and Raves #36

I've always done my own taxes and refuse to allow anyone else to do them for me. I can't do any kind of house repair or car repair, so I guess I have to prove to myself that I can do something!      


You've heard the old saying, "God didn't make no trash." Well, that's probably true, but I can't help but believe He came very close in some instances.   


You know someone has been watching way too much TV when they start saying stuff like, "Don't forget about our meeting at ten, nine Central, seven Pacific."


Only banker's logic could conclude that 1.5 % (a rate you might expect on your savings) is high, while 10.5 % (a rate you might pay on a loan) is low.


It's always nice to have at least one light sleeper in any house.   


The average child is happier than the average adult. There's a good reason for this. Children live much simpler and much less complicated lives than do adults. Therefore, I believe the key happiness is to live in childlike simplicity as much as possible.


Any time you do something (even something good) with ulterior motives in mind, it's usually quite transparent to just about everyone.


Could there be any dumber crime than robbing a store of lottery tickets?

March 12, 2008

The Worst Possible Mistake by a Presidential Candidate

What's the worst possible mistake a presidential candidate could make? Would it be screaming in Iowa? Crying in New Hampshire? Getting caught on a boat named Monkey Business? No, I think the worst mistake a presidential candidate could make would be to select a running mate whose last name is Johnson!

Blog Summary


  • No-holds-barred commentary (and humor) by Terry Mitchell on a variety of subjects such as current events, society and culture, politics, personal finance, technology, religion, health and well-being, sports, media issues, and trivia.

    His blog entries have been picked up or linked to by mainstream news services like Reuters, CNN, Wall Street Journal Online, USA Today, the Houston Chronicle, the Austin American-Statesman, the Dallas Morning News, the Chicago Sun Times, the Palm Beach Post, CoxOhio.com, Northwest Florida Daily News, ConsumerAffairs.com, WWL-TV, WMUR, and WNBC. In addition to his blogging, he is currently a regular columnist for etalkinghead.com and American Chronicle. He has also written over 100 feature-length articles that have appeared on numerous Web sites.

    In this blog, Terry will never miss an opportunity to assail political correctness or take pot shots at the conventional foolishness.

    In this age of information overload, Terry knows that most people don't have time to read long, rambling blog entries. Therefore, he serves up most of his posts on this blog in small, bite-size portions. You'll appreciate his cut-to-the-chase writing style that gets straight to the point without the unnecessary and boring lead-ins.

    Also, Terry makes following promises in regard to this blog that very few bloggers will make:

    1) Posts which are always family-friendly and free of profanity and vulgarity (despite this fact, this blog is never boring and never shies away from controversy).

    2) A reasonable effort to assure proper spelling, grammar, punctuation, capitalization, and sentence structure.

    Readers are free to comment, both pro and con, on any post. However, any comments that include profanity or name-calling will be promptly deleted. One who cannot defend his position on a given issue without resorting to such tactics is, at best, too ignorant to adequately defend his position, and at worst, lacking a defensible position altogether.

    For Terry's biography (in his own words), see the "ABOUT" link on the left side of this page, just below his photo.

Search


  • Google
    Web This Blog

Ezine Articles Expert Author


  • EzineArticles.com/?expert=Terry__Mitchell Platinum Author