Archive for July, 2013

Bad Money After Bad

Wednesday, July 31st, 2013

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

The Minnesota Department of Education is pulling ads because a DJ made jokes about schools (actually, pretty good jokes).

Worse, these are Public Service Announcements, which run for free. The station is giving away free air time, and the dept is pulling those spots. Did the station management see this coming and set it up to be able to sell that time to a paying account?

And seriously, does anybody believe running a radio ad saying “read more books” will do anything to overcome the centuries-old legacy of slavery, poverty, despair, neglect, crime and Liberalism that is the root cause of illiteracy and ignorance in Minnesota?

This dust-up is proof positive the Department of Education has too little to do and too much money to do it with. Abolish it.

Joe Doakes

More proof they have too much money? Spending literacy money at a top-40 station like KDWB, a station devoted to making people dumber.

They’re Going To Need A New Chanting Point

Wednesday, July 31st, 2013

Two months ago, Wisconsin (along with, ahem, North Dakota) came in 49th out of 50 states in a Philadephia Fed report on economic growth.

Liberals chortled with glee, declaring Scott Walker a dead issue. 

Then last month the Philly Fed uprated Sconnie to 20th.

And now?

And with new numbers out today for June, Wisconsin is now ranked 5th in new rankings among states on their six month economic outlook. For those keeping track, that’s 40th, to 20th, to 5th in just a couple months.

 

And in another leading economic indicator, the coincidence index, Wisconsin ranks 2nd.

These numbers are not the be-all and end-all of economic reporting.  I’m  not presenting them as such.

But some people sure did. Two months ago, anyway.

The Problem…

Wednesday, July 31st, 2013

…with trying to debate economics with liberals is that even their “elites” have no idea how it works.

Those Cows Left The Barn

Wednesday, July 31st, 2013

I expect conservatives and libertarians to be exercised over the news that the White House is establishing a “Nudge Squad” – a group of behavioral scientists who will work with the government bureaucracy to try to help shape citizen behavior:

“Behavioral sciences can be used to help design public policies that work better, cost less, and help people to achieve their goals,” reads the government document describing the program, which goes on to call for applicants to apply for positions on the team.

The document was emailed by Maya Shankar, a White House senior adviser on social and behavioral sciences, to a university professor with the request that it be distributed to people interested in joining the team. The idea is that the team would “experiment” with various techniques, with the goal of tweaking behavior so people do everything from saving more for retirement to saving more in energy costs.

The document praises subtle policies to change behavior that have already been implemented in England, which already has a “Behavioral Insights Team.” One British policy concerns how to get late tax filers to pay up.

On the one hand, it all sounds very Orwellian.  And it is; using the government to shape peoples’ behavior is a short and utterly undefineable step away from using it to shape peoples’ thought.

On the other hand?  Precisely what has the public education system been since its inception?

The Impossible

Wednesday, July 31st, 2013

They say it can’t happen.

It can.

But miracles are 99% hard work.

This Is What Democracy Acts Like

Wednesday, July 31st, 2013

Most people – even pro-“choice” Democrats – h favor some sort of restriction on later-term abortions, like the proposed 20 week limit in Texas:

A recent WSJ/NBC news poll has some data that might shock Democrats: Wendy Davis and her sneakers aside, a plurality of Americans support 20 week abortion bans of the kind passed in Texas. Forty-four percent of respondents said they would support the ban, with 37 percent opposed. And the numbers get more interesting the further down you dig. WSJ:

The Journal/NBC poll showed a complexity of views on the bans. More women than men supported the state bans, 46% to 40%. Even college-educated women, a group that strongly supports abortion rights, tipped toward favoring the 20-week restrictions.

And, of course, when you expand the field of questioning from 20-week bans to late-term restrictions in general, the support gets even higher. As Gallup found, “One of the clearest messages from Gallup trends is that Americans oppose late-term abortion.”

As much as liberals genuflect to Europe, you’d think that the fact that even France and Germany put even tighter time limits on abortion – 10-12 weeks, the last I checked – would start even some of them thinking.

And maybe it has, if this poll tells us anything.

Details, Details

Wednesday, July 31st, 2013

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Here’s the scenario making the rounds of Liberal blogs:
“Imagine your daughter is walking home from the store, and a man in a car starts following her.
She tries to take a route that his car can’t follow, and he gets out to chase her on foot.
She stops running and defends herself (knees him in the groin, pepper sprays him, whatever).
He doesn’t even try to defend himself with hand-to-hand, he just pulls out a gun and shoots her.
Suddenly, she is called the aggressor and he gets off on self-defense.
Would you still be celebrating? Would it make a difference if your daughter had ever smoked pot?”

Self-defense law is fact-specific. A tiny change in the facts makes all the difference to the outcome. Start from the basic premise that we want people to avoid physical violence, which is why self-defense law includes a duty to retreat if safe. Now tinker with the facts a bit . . .

Suppose Daughter is a 20-year-old Olympic-class runner and Stalker is fat, flabby and forty. She could easily outrun him but instead chooses to turn and knee him. Result: she’s the aggressor and he has the right to defend himself from her wrongful attack but only using proportionate force, not deadly force. If he shoots her, he goes to prison.

Suppose Daughter and Stalker are age, size and condition. She can’t outrun him. She can’t safely retreat. She turns to face him. He says “Hi, new around here? Where you running to?” so she smashes him across the nose with a bat. He staggers and falls on his back. She stands over him lying on the sidewalk, beating his head with the bat. Result: she is the aggressor and he has the right to defend himself from her wrongful attack using deadly force. If he shoots her, he goes free.

Really, is it that hard to understand?

Joe Doakes

If the left couldn’t oversimplify complex issues into meaninglessness, they’d be pretty mute…

The Pollyanna President

Tuesday, July 30th, 2013

Sometime today, The One will be giving his second speech (in Chattanooga) of his tenth attempt, give or take, to “pivot to the economy” in the past five years.

I’ll invite you to read this short but deep piece by Richard Epstein at the Hoover Institution, about the shallowness of Obama’s understanding – he’s more of a sloganeer, really – of how economies actually work, and how it’s manifested itself in a middle class that’s been largely bludgeoned into submission.

Read the whole thing, but here’s the conclusion:

Indeed [President Obama] constantly thinks of his greatest regulatory failures as his great successes. No other president has “saved the auto industry,” albeit by a corrupt bankruptcy process, or “taken on a broken health care system,” only to introduce a set of unworkable mandates that are already falling apart, or “investing in new technologies,” which tries to pick winners and ends up with losers like Solyndra. The great advances in energy have come from private developments, most notably fracking, and not from the vagaries of wind and solar energy, which no one has yet figured out how to store for future use when needed.

The President seems utterly incapable of seeing the downside to any of his policy choices. They are announced from on-high as all gain and no pain. In the face of stagnant growth, weak corporate earnings, and continued high unemployment, he shows not the slightest recognition that some of his programs might have gone amiss.

It is easy to see, therefore, why people have tuned out the President’s recent remarks. They have heard it all countless times before. So long as the President is trapped in his intellectual wonderland that puts redistribution first and regards deregulation and lower taxation as off limits, we as a nation will be trapped in the uneasy recovery that will continue to dog us no matter who is chosen to head the Federal Reserve.

If there were ever a time for someone to come onto the scene – or re-emerge, perhaps – with something on the order of “A Time For Choosing”, this would be it.

Mighta Been

Tuesday, July 30th, 2013

While Mitt Romney wasn’t my dream candidate, few things more infuriated me last year than the idea that the Ron Paul wing of the GOP robotically chanted – that Romney was the same as Obama.

That noted conservative tool Salon notes that it just isn’t so.  The article runs down a hypothetical first 200 days of a Romney administration, based on its own publicly stated (and some privately-stated) plans:

Romney aides wince at the comparison, but their 200-day plans sound like a Bain turn-around for America’s economy: a co-ordinated series of shocks aimed at impressing investors, but likely to startle and anger many ordinary folk. Democrats would have scorned it as a wish-list for bosses and billionaires. But Mr Romney believed his reforms would work, and work fast. Benefits would follow swiftly, in the form of private investment and job creation: persuading the wider public to trust in President Romney’s competence, if not to love him.

I don’t care about “loving” a president.  I just care about heading in the right direction. 

We are, currently, not.

Declined

Tuesday, July 30th, 2013

Allow me to do an end-zone happy dance.  It may be a brief one, but I’m gonna dance anyway.

Julie Miller, a woman from Oregon, filed suit against Equifax after a two-year battle to get her credit report corrected.  She won an $18 million settlement:

Ms. Miller contacted Equifax eight times between 2009 and 2011 trying to rectify the mistakes. The jury awarded Ms. Miller $18.4million in punitive damages and $180,000 in compensatory damages.

Mistakes included erroneous accounts and collection attempts, the wrong Social Security number and birthday, according to a copy of the lawsuit reviewed by MailOnline.

 

‘There was damage to her reputation, a breach of her privacy and the lost opportunity to seek credit,’ said Portland attorney Justin Baxter. ‘She has a brother who is disabled and who can’t get credit on his own, and she wasn’t able to help him.’

Ms. Miller claims in the suit that she discovered the mangled mess made of her credit report after being denied credit by a local bank in December 2009. She reached out to Equifax and complied with multiple requests for forms and additional information only to have her efforts repeatedly go nowhere. Additional efforts to obtain copies of her credit report also proved unsuccessful.

The credit bureaux should be happy I wasn’t the judge.  I’d have authorized their complete sell-off and liquidation, using the National Guard if necessary.  Yep, I’ve fought with Equifax too. 

The credit reporting industry has an absurd amount of power – and while I joke (and not in a “hah hah” kind of way) about using the Air Force to re-jigger the market, and acknowledge they serve a role in the free market, they do the job really, really badly. 

The 18 million dollar settlement will no doubt get shaved down to $5000 at appeal.  But it’s a start.

They Warned Us…

Tuesday, July 30th, 2013

…that if we voted for Mitt Romney, media demigogues would so poison race relations that violence would break out in the street.

And they were right:

According the victim, one of the attackers yelled, “This is for Trayvon,” during the assault. The victim suffered lacerations to the face from the attack.

Police said the suspects took the man’s wallet and iPhone. The police report lists the incident as robbery force violence, hate bias incident.

And if the victim had shot in self-defense, we could go through it all over again.

Conversations I Hope I Hear Someday

Monday, July 29th, 2013

WOMAN:  You’re “mansplaining”. 

GUY: Huh?

WOMAN: “Mansplaining”.  When a guys gives a condescending and inaccurate explanation that the assumption that I’m entirely ignorant on the subject matter or topic.

GUY:  You are utterly ignorant of the subject matter and topic.  Our discussion has shown you haven’t the foggiest clue about the subject.  90 degrees removed from literacy.

WOMAN: You’re doing it again.  You’re mansplaining.

GUY: You’re being a whineanist.  You need to unisexshushupandlearnsomething.

(And SCENE)

The Minnesota Left’s War Against Women Who Think For Themselves

Monday, July 29th, 2013

I noticed this late last week; Buzzfeed noting that the GOP is working on a national level to turn the Democrats’ “War on Women” rhetoric back in their faces:

After enduring an election year in which the Obama campaign advanced a largely successful narrative that the GOP’s platform was anti-woman, the Republican National Committee has spent much of the past month gleefully highlighting the indiscretions and sexual harassment charges of male Democratic politicians.

With a flurry of public memos, tweets, and op-eds, the RNC is working to make the Democratic Party take ownership of Eliot Spitzer, who resigned the New York governorship after a prostitution scandal and is now running for city comptroller; San Diego Mayor Bob Filner, now facing allegations of sexual harassment; and Weiner, whose online sexual dalliances have driven the political news cycle all week, and given RNC communications director Sean Spicer some irresistible ammunition.

I’m inclined to call Reince Preibus and tell him to send his counter-message SWAT team here to Minnesota.

We’ve got a doozy for him.

———-

I had a conversation with a modestly prominent MNGOP source last week. Yet again, the source noted, the DFL-leaning media was trying, in their words, to “shame” a female conservative.

I’m not going to identify the former political figure involved; they’ve asked for people to keep their noses out of their private lives, and I’m going to do exactly that, and urge you to do the same.

But the source referred me to the Twitter feed of Shawn Towle, of “Checks and Balances”, a regional political publication.

Last week Towle tweeted with the breathless glee of a seventh-grader who’s just disovered his older brother’s stash of Playboys:

@ChecksnBalances: @ChecksnBalances: Breaking: alla #weiner style @UMNnews confirmed via source this pic [whose link I’m going to redact] is [the female conservative] 

Towle tries, in successive tweets and with his oddly stunted written delivery (I think “alla” means “a la”), to equate the “incident” – a photo of a female conservative in her underwear – to the Anthony Weiner controversy. 

I’m going to redact the photo; it’s on a “Tumblr” blog with one post – a photo – and no comments. 

And if you have read Shawn Towle, it doesn’t seem a big stretch to think that he does think there’s an equivalence between…:

  • …a sitting congressman sending raunchy photos to women who hadn’t actually solicited them, and…
  • …someone who is not an elected official and whose mildly racy photos – from an episode amid some extreme marital difficulty – were distributed and published very much against her will.

Or, for that matter, that Aaron Rupar of the City Pages – who writes about this “issue” like he’s covering the fall of the Twin Towers, only with that little tinge of smug, self-righteous prurience he seems to bring to “reporting” on conservative women with marital difficulties or boyfriend trouble – thinks this is a story.

How bad was Towle and Rupar’s “reporting?”  Even Nick Coleman – who rarely has a kind or constructive word to say to anyone to the right of his little brother Chris, the Mayor of Saint Paul – twote:

@NickColeman: City Pages published a pic of [the subject of the story] in underwear? Why on earth? Have they been to the beach? Maybe CP should get out more.

Or stock up on toilet paper.

And Dave Mindeman at mnpAct tweeted:

@newtbuster: [the subject] Story – Embarrassment for Her..Unnecessary For Public http://t.co/DPE18sgV0V

Yep.  This “story” serves no purpose, other than to try to stick it to someone that Rupar and Towle disagree with, in the most personal, ugly way possible.  (And no, none of the links you see in my story lead to the actual “story”)

But the real story here isn’t the fact that a couple of wanna-be liberal journos have gotten themselves a week’s worth of whacking material.

No, there are three real stories here:

Stalking– I’ll take the subject of this story at her word that the photo in question was obtained and distributed illegally.  The woman who is the subject of this story has been cyber-stalked – with the complete, onanistic approval of at least two Twin Cities “media” outlets (and the tacit approval, I maintain, of most of the rest of the media). 

While a civil suit seems a long shot, I do sincerely hope the FBI does in fact find someone to charge in this gross invasion of privacy – and that there are consequences for Towle, Rupar, Checks and Balances and the City Pages.  In a just world, there’d be some way to sue them back to the stone age. 

The Scarlet “C” – It’s that this is the kind of thing that every female conservative in Minnesota faces if they give the Big Left’s smear machine even the slightest whiff of imperfection.  As I said on Friday, there’s a yawning double standard; Bill Clinton’s serial philandering was “Just Sex”; Elliot Spitzer and Anthony Weiner and Jesse Jackson’s sexual (and pseudo-sexual) peccadillos are accepted as the sort of thing that goes along with being great and powerful.  But if a conservative woman for any reason colors outside the social lines that the left abandoned for themselves in the 1970s – gets divorced, has a social life that doesn’t pass their all-critical muster?  They get turned into Hester Prynne with a healthy dollop of puritan-via-Beavis-And-Butthead “shaming” thrown in on top.

Women, to Democrats, are supposed to be barefoot, Democrat, and marching to the voting booth to thank the nice Democrat for their abortion and contraceptives.  Thinking for themselves is the real crime.

 Er, “Blind” Hate – Beyond sheer illogic and “shaming”, though, there’s a whole ‘nother layer of depravity at work here.  What Towle and Rupar have done is isn’t just an Alinsky-ite smear job using the tactics of the internet stalker – which would be bad enough. 

To dig into the personal details of a wretchedly difficult part of a couple’s personal life – a couple that is not currently involved in politics, no less – and pruriently splash it all over the public square?  That’s beyond politics, beyond spite.  That’s the kind of ritual misogyny you see in mobs of inbred cretins stoning a woman for infidelity in some Godforsaken third world backwater. 

If you’re a female conservative, really, that’s what the Democrats – and their junior-league PR interns at the City Pages – are these days; rural Iran with better coffee.

———-

Questioned about this, liberals say “serves them right, belonging to a moralistic party” – which would be illogical even if their own party was itself morally consistent (which it’s not; the self-appointed party of the poor and the working class has left us with a terrible economy for workers.  The self-professed party of minorities has made the economy worse for minorities, and has increased racial strife in this country, all the while mining minority communities for votes.  The putative party of women has made “womanhood” all about the disposition of a uterus).  It’s the ad hominem tu quoque, arguing that personal inconsistency invalidates an argument.  This line of illogic would have you believe that stumping for a moral case is invalidated by not living up to it in every facet of one’s life; it’s actually quite the opposite. 

No.  The only reason this sort of non-story “story” gets covered by lefty “journalists” – and “covered” to the point they risk going blind – is that, true to Alinsky, it makes an example of any woman that leaves the liberal plantation.  It’s done to warn other women – and blacks, latinos, Asians and gays – not to make waves.  To sit down on the left side of the bus, and shut up, or the personal cost to you and your family will be just too high.

The only reason it hasn’t worked so far is that so many of Minnesota’s conservative women have enough guts to make Red Adair look like Woody Allen.

Paging Alanis Morrisette

Monday, July 29th, 2013

An Obamacare call center will not offer benefits.

From the National Review’s Eliana Johnson at NRO.  She’s the daughter of Powerline’s Scott Johnson, and is rapidly becoming one of the best conservative journalists out there.

——–

CORRECTION:  It’s not the Obamacare federal call center.  It’s a state center. 

It’s still like rain on your wedding day and such, but still.

Dismal Foreground, Dismal Background

Monday, July 29th, 2013

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Governor Dayton says George Zimmerman “went way beyond” what was necessary in the Trayvon situation and thus, Stand Your Ground laws are bad. Aside from Stand Your Ground having nothing to do with that case, specifically Governor, what did George Zimmerman do that was “way beyond?”

Was it when he joined the Neighborhood Watch, was that “way beyond” what was necessary? People shouldn’t join Neighborhood Watch?

When he called 911 upon seeing a person acting suspiciously? People shouldn’t call 911?

Getting out of his car to better direct law enforcement to where the suspect was hiding, was that “way beyond?” People shouldn’t help police?

Returning to his car when the dispatcher told him “we don’t need you to do that,” was that “way beyond?” People shouldn’t obey police?

Failing to run away when Trayvon confronted him, asking Trayvon what he was up to – was that “way beyond?”

Everybody – even Trayvon’s girlfriend on the phone – agrees Trayvon threw the first punch that broke Zimmerman’s nose. Was that Zimmerman’s mistake – allowing his nose to be broken, was that going “way beyond?”

Everybody – including the prosecution, at the end – conceded Trayvon was sitting on Zimmerman’s chest, holding him down so he couldn’t get away and banging his head on the cement sidewalk. Was that when Zimmerman went “way beyond,” leaving all that blood lying around?

All six jurors agreed that Zimmerman truly believed Trayvon was going to kill him. Was forming that belief, going “way beyond?”

Shooting Trayvon to save his own life – was that going “way beyond?” At that instant, what should Zimmerman have done, instead?

I’m willing to give up my pistol permit and throw my pistol in the lake – if the Governor can explain to me what Zimmerman SHOULD have done differently to achieve the same outcome. So far, not hearing any good explanations.

That’s the problem with trying to talk Second Amendment issues with liberals; so many of them pretend to be lawyers on the issue, and yet know nothing about the subject.

Even the lawyers

Even the prosecutors.

#Still So Focused

Friday, July 26th, 2013

“Kluwe’s tactics are the epitome of his generation – foul-mouthed personal attacks against anyone who disagrees. Pro-lockout players are “douchebags” who stand for “pretty much the definition of greed.” His opponents are “a**hole f**kwits”, which also suggests he’s a plagiarist since I’m sure he stole that from Oscar Wilde.” – SITD, May 6th

—-

“plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose” — “the more it changes, the more it’s the same thing” – novelist Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr

https://twitter.com/ChrisWarcraft/status/360050336465039362

Stay classy, Mr. Kluwe.

The Axis Breaks

Friday, July 26th, 2013

By the standards of his twenty-one years of rule, Benito Mussolini’s meeting at the Italian Royal Palace of Caserta was an unusual one.  The head of the Italian government and self-styled Il Duce (The Leader) of Fascism, Mussolini was unaccustomed to being given orders.  But in addition to his other titles, Mussolini was also the Prime Minister and, in theory, although not in practice, subservient to the Italian Monarch Victor Emmanuel III.

With Sicily invaded on July 10th and Rome bombed for the first time on the 19th, Mussolini believed he was to modestly report to the diminutive (both in size and stature) Monarch.  Barely a few sentences into their meeting, Emmanuel III shocked his guest by declaring he was enacting his right to remove Il Duce from power.  A stunned Mussolini emerged from Caserta only to be arrested by the Carabinieri or military police.  The father of Fascism, the man whose ideology inspired countless imitators around the world and indirectly launched the most destructive war in human history was deposed.

Benito the Beneficent: Mussolini in 1923 at the height of his popularity among the democracies

(more…)

The Runaway Juror

Friday, July 26th, 2013

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

lady, you were on the jury; if you thought he was guilty of murder, why didn’t you convict him? “The law couldn’t prove it.”

Now wait a minute. If the law couldn’t prove he committed murder, then he didn’t commit murder. You are the one who sat through the entire trial, heard all the evidence, heard the jury instruction, and found him not guilty. “Murder” is a specific crime. He didn’t commit murder. You said so.

Yes, Zimmerman killed a man. Lots of soldiers and cops have killed men, too. But none of them committed “murder.”

She’s accusing him of a horrible crime that she, herself, decided he didn’t commit. That’s slander. Somebody should tell her to pipe down.

Joe Doakes

When I first heard the story, the first thing I thought was “George Zimmerman should have a pretty righteous defamation case”.

The second? I think it was PJ O’Rourke who said the problem with our justice system is that your fate is decided by 12 people who couldn’t get out of jury duty…

Caravan Of Ghouls

Friday, July 26th, 2013

Michael Bloomberg’s “Mayors Against Illegal Guns” – aka the “Tragedy Exploitation Tour” – will be stopping in Minneapolis (where else?) next week:

Heinrich–

On Wednesday at 10:00 AM, the No More Names bus tour will be stopping in Minneapolis to read out the names of those killed by gun violence and to demand action from our leaders.

Will you join us?

Here are the details:

What: Minneapolis No More Names Rally

When: Wednesday, July 31st, 10:00 AM

Where: US Federal Courthouse Plaza
300 South 4th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55415

The bus departed from Newtown, CT six months after the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, commemorating those killed with guns — and determined to turn the tide on six months of inaction from Congress.

In each state where the tour stops, it’s up to supporters like you to speak up for laws that protect our communities from future tragedies.

So please join us at the rally on Wednesday:

Thanks for all you do,

Mayors Against Illegal Guns

P.S. — We are planning to read the names of those killed by gun violence in 25 states across the country. But the bus will only keep running with your support. Please pitch in $33 or more today:

I can’t make it Wednesday – duty calls.

But I think an ideal counterdemonstration would be this; for every name read off that was killed by someone who’d never obey any gun law, no matter what it was – someone with a demonstrable criminal record, for example – someone shout out “killed by a criminal”.

If I could make it, I might hold up a sign that reads:

WELCOME, CARAVAN TO EXPLOIT THE DEATHS OF KIDS WHO LOOK LIKE NPR EXECUTIVES’ KIDS. 

WHERE’S THE OUTRAGE OVER ALL THE BLACK KIDS KILLED IN CHICAGO?

I might need some help holding that one.

Retail Indicators

Friday, July 26th, 2013

I was talking with a friend of mine in the retail business the other day. She works at a store in Uptown Minneapolis.

“Minnesota leftybloggers must be working on stories about a vaguely sexual scandal involving a conservative woman” she said.

“Why?”, I asked.

“Because I can’t keep Jergens or paper towles in stock”.

I had no idea what she meant.  (more…)

A Cold Greece

Friday, July 26th, 2013

From the City of Minneapolis website, with emphasis added:

Regular meeting of the Minneapolis City Council Committee of the Whole standing committee and Intergovernmental Relations subcommittee.
Municipal Utility: 10:00 a.m. public hearing to consider authorizing the establishment of a municipal electrical utility and authorizing the City to own, operate, construct, and extend electric facilities and to purchase and acquire the property of any existing electrical public utility operating within the City of Minneapolis for the purpose of providing electrical and related services.
10:30 a.m. public hearing to consider authorizing the establishment of a municipal gas utility and authorizing the City to own, operate, construct, and extend gas and similar facilities and to purchase and acquire the property of any existing gas public utility operating within the City of Minneapolis for the purpose of providing natural gas and similar services.

Minneapolis’ unofficial motto: “100 Years of Socialism: Someday It Might Work”

Oh, yeah. Excel will shut down its Minneapolis headquarters if the city takes over the city’s power business.

More government union jobs, I guess.

Big Sis May Be Gone…

Friday, July 26th, 2013

…but her slander of conservative groups lives on.  A group of Campus Republicans in Missouri were barred admission to Obama’s big Economic speech because of the “safety risk”:

Despite the fact that the students had tickets to the event, security personnel turned them away at the door to the recreation center where Obama gave a speech on economic policy, telling the group it wasn’t about their politics but the president’s safety, University of Missouri College Republicans Treasurer Courtney Scott told The College Fix.

The clear goal?  Slander conservatives and their groups at every turn, knowing that the media will ignore the mistakes, carry the apologies at face value, and never, ever question the Administration.

A Day Mostly Off

Thursday, July 25th, 2013

Posting will be light-ish today.  More tomorrow!

Not Our Problem

Wednesday, July 24th, 2013

Seventy yeears ago this morning, Commander Lawrence Daspit and his submarine, the USS Tinosa, were stalking their prey.

Tinosa returns from a wartime patrol.

Their target, the 19,000 ton tanker Tonan Maru Number 3, was one of the largest tankers in the Japanese merchant fleet.  

And despite the fact that the war was a year and a half old by this point, Tonan Maru was not only proceeding at 13 knots (about 16 mph) without air or surface escorts, but wasn’t even zig-zagging. 

It was the naval equivalent of having a twelve point buck walk into your bar, order and chug down six Jägermeister shots, and insult your sister at the height of deer season. 

Daspit maneuvered his submarine directly perpendicular to the tanker’s course, so the torpedoes would impact the target squarely, just as the textbooks said.  He fired four Mark XIV torpedoes.  It was a textbook shot; short range, perfect visibility through the periscope, perfect angle on the target.

The torpedos all ran straight – but Daspit only saw two small gouts of water spout up alongside the ship.  Two torpedoes had apparently missed, and the other two misfired; the spouts may have been exploding compressed air flasks aboard the torpedoes.

Tonan Maru turned sharply away from the attack, and started accelerating – which was a slow process with a relatively big ship that wasn’t built for speed.  Daspit fired the remaining two torpedoes from his forward tubes – Tinosa had six facing forward and four more aft.  The angle was not ideal; Tonan Maru was making 13-14 knots, and Tinosa could only move at 8-9 knots underwater, so the torpedoes intersected the tanker’s course at a fairly sharp angle. 

But Daspit’s marksmanship was impeccable – and this was many years before guided torpedoes became common, and the Mark XIV was a straight-running torpedo.  Both torpedoes hit the Tonan Maru, exploding near the tanker’s stern.  Tonan Maru coasted to a stop. 

Daspit maneuvered Tinosa to a point 875 hards to the stopped tanker’s flank.  He lined up another shot.  The torpedo ran straight and true into the tanker’s side…

…and yielded another splash of water from the explosion of the compressed-air tanks.  For the fifth time in seven “fish”, the warhead had failed. 

Frustrated – and, so far, unmolested by Japanese anti-submarine warfare (ASW) forces, Daspit ordered his torpedomen to painstakingly inspect each Mark XIV torpedo before loading and firing it.  The torpedomen inspected each “fish”, pronounced them in perfect condition (as well they should; maintaining the torpedoes was what they did, all patrol, every patrol, like a Formula One racing crew doting over their cars). The torpedo room then loaded them into the torpedo tubes, spun them up, and fired them, one at a time, directly into the flank of Tonan Maru.

Nine more times. 

None of them exploded.  Daspit’s log noted each firing with the precision of an engineering experiment log – and tartly chronicled the failure of each successive Mark XIV.  Daspit planned to save his final torpedo – a plan that was punctuated when he saw a Japanese destroyer approaching through is periscope.  Tinosa sailed back to Pearl Harbor. 

Daspit barged into the office of Admiral Charles Lockwood, commander of US submarines in the Pacific, with a string of obscenities.  Lockwood understood.

Part of it was that 19,000 ton tankers were a frustrating target to lose. 

More than that?  It wasn’t a new problem. 

———-

It’d been over a year and a half since Pearl Harbor.  With its battle fleet sunk, and four aircraft carriers lost in the previous 18 months (Lexington at Coral Sea; Yorktown at Midway; Wasp and Hornet in the furious fighting in the Solomon Islands), the battle was largely the Submarine Service’s to fight.

And fight they did.  In the first days of the war, US submarines started pressing home attacks against Japanese ships all over the Pacific.

And a curious pattern emerged:  skippers of the “S-Class” submarines – built during World War I, and recommissioned from the reserve as war approached – were getting kills. 

An S-Class Submarine

They were old, and much slower than the newer “Fleet boats” that were the vast bulk of the fleet, and they had a tougher time getting into a firing position.  And they were designed for war in the much-smaller Atlantic, so they only rarely had the range to engage Japanese ships…

…but when they got a shot, the torpedoes – World War I-vintage Mark X “fish” – exploded.  Ships were sunk.

In the meantime, although the newer submarines were pressing home attacks aggressively, there was a distinct lack of results. 

The Navy was non-plussed.  Explanations ranged from the inexperience of the torpedo room crews to poor marksmanship to, occasionally, cowardice; at least a few sub commanders were releived of duty.

But as the war patrols ground on, and the same patterns kept reiterating themselves, Commander of Submarines/Pacific (COMSUBPAC) Admiral Lockwood started thinking the problem was the torpedoes themselves.  The Mark XIV torpedo had been designed by the Naval Torpedo Station (NTS), in Newport, Rhode Island, by a group of engineers that were considered among the world’s experts in the craft of building torpedoes.  The Torpedo Station was subordinate to the Bureau of Ordinance (BU-ORD), the bureaucracy that was in charge of designing and/or approving all of the fleet’s onboard weaponry, from anti-aircraft machine guns to 16-inch battleship guns, as well as the torpedoes carried on submarines, PT boats, destroyers and a few cruisers. 

The Mark XIV was a marvel of technology at the time; its turbine engine made it a much faster “fish” than the earlier Mark X.  Most importantly, it had a magnetic detonator, enabling it to explode beneath the enemy ship.  The explosion would create a huge cavity of gas under the ship, into which the ship would sag, fracturing the keel.  In theory.  (And the theory was a good one; it’s the same way the modern Mark 48 found on today’s submarines attacks surface ships). 

Admiral Lockwood – who, unlike most submarine admirals, had spent his entire career as a submariner – was suspicious of the hardware.  But the NTS was certain the problem was with the crews.  Or the maintenance.  Or something.  Not the bureaucracy.

Lockwood ordered one of his submarines to test-fire a series of torpedoes at some borrowed fishing nets – and found for starters that they were running much, much deeper than set. 

A Mark XIV torpedo on display by the USS Bowfin, which is a World War 2-era museum ship at Pearl Harbor, near the USS Arizona memorial.

Torpedoes of the era could be set to run at different depths – to account for smaller or larger targets with shallower or deeper “drafts” (depth below the surface), or to strike below a battleship’s armor plating, or to take advantage of the magnetic detonators.  The depth sensor  – which operated by sensing the water pressure, and maneuvered the torpedo to the desired depth – had originally been located in the middle of the torpedo – but a technical chanage had pushed it aft, along the slope toward the propellor.  Where the onrushing water filling in behind the speeding torpedo had lower pressure, causing the torpedoes to swim deeper to find the pressure analogous to the depth setting. 

The NTS, afflicted with complacent hubris as much as Depression-era budget cuts, had relocated the sensor – and then skipped the testing process.  The change to the depth control went into combat without testing.

Lockwood’s staff advised the submarines to correct their depth settings.

It didn’t help.   Torpedoes still weren’t exploding.  And the NTS and BU-ORD still blamed the fleet. 

Lockwood’s suspicion turned next to the magnetic detonator itself.  Lockwood’s engineers discovered what German submariners had learned a year before; magnetic detonators operate by sensing the magnetic field around a large metal object like a ship – but that magnetic field changes in different parts of the world, just as does Earth’s magnetic field.  Without accounting for those changes, the detonator would be unreliable.

So Lockwhood ordered his skippers to disconnect the magnetic detonators, and rely on the good old-fashioned contact detonators – basically the same mechanism as the firing pin on a rifle. 

And so 70 years ago today the Tinosa fired 15 torpedoes, with two explosions – both of them from glancing blows at bad angles.  It was the only data point the engineers had; straight 90 degree hits – theoretically perfect hits – would go dud, while glancing blows at oblique angles would explode, sometimes. 

Orders when out to a fleet full of perplexed skippers; take shots at oblique angles.  Avoid straight-on hits.  Those were, of course, harder shots to hit – but the rate of explosions rose. 

Finally, Lockwood ordered a submarine to fire a load of torpedoes into a cliff on the Hawaiian coast.  As expected, only a few of the torpedoes exploded.  Divers recovered – veeery carefully – the dud fish, and the engineers at Pearl Harbor took them apart…

…and found out that the contact detonators – the “firing pin” assemblies for the torpedoes – were twisted out of shape by the impact with the target; the force of the impact with the cliffs, or ships, bent the system’s guide rails before the firing pin could strike the explosive primer.  It was mechanically nearly identical to the assembly on the older Mark X torpedoes…

…which were 15 mph slower than the Mark XIV.  The extra energy caused by all that extra speed released physical forces that were beyond the older assemblies’ design tolerances…

…except when the hit was an off-angle glancing blow.   Like the Tinosa’s two “hail Mary” shots. 

The NTS was non-plussed.  BU-ORD hushed the story up until long after the war.  They had never tested the firing mechanism under real-world conditions with the new, faster torpedoes.

Lockwood’s engineers built new guide rails – machined out of metal salvaged from the propellors of Japanese planes shot down at Pearl Harbor; lighter, stiffer, better able to stand up to the stresses involved in smacking into a steel wall at 45 knots (55 mph). 

And finally – over a year and a half into the war – the US Navy’s submarine service was truly ready for combat. 

The subs sank over half of the Japanese ships lost in the war; they actually accomplished with Japan what the Germans attempted to do with Britain – starved it out.  Japan was utterly dependent on overseas trade for most of its economy, especially oil – and without a merchant marine, there was no way for Japan to get oil, or most other raw materials.  There is a strong case to be made that the submarines did the lion’s share of the work defeating Japan.  And because of the difficulties with the Mark XIV torpedo, they really didn’t get a start on the job until late 1943. 

It came at a cost, of course; 22 US submarines were sunk in action, 20 are still missing in action – they still don’t know what happened to them, although it’s presumed they were lost in action – and 10 were lost in various training or testing accidents. Over 3,000 submariners died, making it the most dangerous job in the Navy.

Nobody knows how many of those subs were lost as they watched their torpedoes bounce ineffectually off the sides of their targets. 

And the Bureau of Ordinance and the Naval Torpedo Station, like most government bureucracies, never really did get called to account.   At least one senior submariner, after the war, moped that it was a shame they couldn’t have spared one atomic bomb for the Naval Torpedo Station.

Zep, Maaaaan

Wednesday, July 24th, 2013

The Goodyear Blimp is going to be replaced by the Goodyear Zeppelin.

Don’t know the difference (I did – as a result of a long jag of obsessive reading about lighter-than-air craft in elementary school and junior high)?

Well, you will.

--> Site Meter -->