« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Morning Briefing for January 30, 2012

RedState Morning Briefing

January 30, 2012

Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.

———————————————————————-

1. Nothing’s Shocking

It is a sad commentary on the state of our world that stories like this one (warning, .pdf) (via the Population Research Institute) barely shock us anymore. The gist of the story is as follows: a Massachusetts woman, identified in court pleadings only as Mary Moe, is pregnant with her third child. She aborted her first child. Sometime between this abortion and the birth of her second child, she suffered a “psychotic break” and was diagnosed with shizophrenia and bipolar mood disorder, for which she takes medication. Reading inbetween the lines, it is reasonable to assume that the woman’s first abortion may have been a contributing factor in her mental illness.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. $16.4 Trillion in Debt By End of Year

So this is what the “age of budget austerity” looks like?

Yesterday, the Senate voted against a measure to disapprove of Obama’s request for an additional $1.2 trillion of debt. Every Democrat (except for Ben Nelson and Joe Manchin) voted against the resolution. Consequently, pursuant to the Budget Control Act (the “debt ceiling deal”), Obama will automatically get his new credit card. Our debt will increase by another $1.2 trillion, topping $16.4 trillion by the end of the year.

Here are the relevant numbers that should define Obama’s presidency, yet they will not be disseminated in the major media. When Obama took office, the total federal debt stood at $10.6 trillion. By the end of his first term, the debt will be at least $16.4 trillion, an increase of $5.8 trillion. To put that in perspective, it took us until late 2001 (from our nation’s founding) to accrue $5.8 trillion in debt. Even President Bush, who was a big-spending Republican, racked up “only” $4.9 trillion over 8 years.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. Why Mitt Romney’s Electability is Not Inevitable

After many months of getting a pass, it seems that the other candidates are willing to finally start hitting Governor Mitt Romney on his major weakness: The Massachusetts Health Care Insurance Reform Law. The bill, known by most as Romneycare, is (as we all have been saying for many moons) the basis for the much maligned Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise affectionately known as Obamacare.

I’ve been in endless debates and discussions with Romney supporters and surrogates for some time now as they paint a beautiful picture of the ultimate State’s Rights battle. They claim that Romneycare vs Obamacare isn’t about socialized medicine vs the free market. They say it’s actually the core of the Federalist struggle and that Romney will channel Mr. Smith Goes to Washington and march onto the capital steps, fulfilling the dreams and desires of tea partiers nationwide by finally standing up and saying, “Enough is enough! Let the state’s make their decisions Obama! Your days of tyranny are at an end!” And they all rejoiced.

Yet, continually when Romney is approached on this subject in the debates with fellow Republicans, he seems incapable of defending any other point and seems befuddled at the idea that there might be more than one part about Obamacare that American’s had wholly objected to. For him, it’s all about the mandate.

But it’s important to keep in mind, Mitt Romney does not object to the concept of mandates. Far from it actually.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

4. Why is the GOP Florida Legislature Trying to Screw Allen West?

As an outspoken black conservative with a high national profile, Allen West already had a huge national target painted on his back going in to 2012. As part of reapportionment as a result of the 2010 census, Florida gained 2 Congressional seats. Despite that, it appears that the Republican-controlled Florida legislature seems to have somehow managed to make Allen West’s seat much more difficult to defend.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

5. What’s Wrong with Peak Oil Theory? Consider ‘Peak Gas’.

In 1956, M. King Hubbert predicted that crude oil production in the U.S. (ex-Alaska) would peak in rate around 1970, to be followed by a long, irreversible decline. Hubbert nailed the timing of the peak, and in doing so, cemented his status as a technological visionary among neo-Malthusians and opponents of the “fossil fuels”. But Hubbert’s paper also contained a similar forecast for gas.

In 1956, Hubbert’s estimate of the amount of natural gas that would ultimately be consumed in the U.S. was 850 trillion cubic feet (TCF).

In the 1978 update, Hubbert increased his estimate to 1,103 TCF, but considered that value to be on the high side.

By the end of 2010, we had produced and marketed 1,131 TCF from the Lower 48, more gas than Hubbert thought would ever be possible. We find ourselves in the midst of a natural gas boom, with gas production now exceeding the peaks of 1973: rates are over three times higher than the 7 TCF per year Hubbert foresaw for 2010. The Lower 48 resource base is some 3,100 TCF, three to four times Hubbert’s earlier estimates.

Peak Oilers rarely mention Peak Gas. Hubbert expected his method to work for all resources; why did it fail with respect to gas? The answers to that question shed light on the shortcomings of Peak Oil Theory, and reveal the reasons why it should not be used as a policy-making tool.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • baracksolyndraobama

    Here’s why:

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-01-27/swing-states-poll/52871890/1

    My focus is beating Obama. It will soon be time for thousands here to make that their goal, too. It is my prayer that there exists such maturity here.

    And, to the dead-enders here, a flashback: Erick Erickson endorsed Romney in ’08. Sure, he had his reasons; but, he, in fact, endorsed him in the last cycle.

    In the end, dream candidates, pixie dust, and flying unicorns do not exist.

  • In The Hook

    I’m not excited about voting for Romney, though I will easily pull that trigger here in the Old Dominion since my only other choice is Ron Paul. Yeah no thanks.

    And yes, polls can change quite a bit over time but Romney has consistently been the best heads up against Obama. I think that’s because he’s as close to generic as we have left. I was a big Pawlenty supporter because he was a solid conservative but moderate enough in his attitude that he could be seen as the ultimate generic Republican.

    Newt has baggage and bombast galore. Easy target. Paul is Paul. Santorum is a good man but will get guns trained on him from all sides for his social positions… ones that he plays up as opposed to say, Gov. McDonnell who has similar views but plays them down and talks about the economy, the economy and oh yeah, the economy.

    Romney is the best left of a weak field. It’s irritating and upsets me. But we can’t blame Mitt that Perry didn’t gain traction, that Pawlenty ran a terrible campaign, that Huntsman gave the finger to the base and that guys like Daniels and Jindal didn’t run. We should be mad at the better candidates for flaming out or not running in this critical election.

  • noveldog9

    I have noted that as a usual rule the news media will put Mitt on briefly, then they will switch to Gingrich so he can leave the last impression with the voters. Newt also usually gets a three to one advantage in free air time over Mitt.

    Recently just before the SC primary, he (Gingrich) was featured on every channel in NC every day for the week leading up to the primary election day. Now the same thing is occurring all over again as the Florida election day approaches.

    Gingrich called Romney a Moderate during the first several months of the campaign, now he has resorted to calling him a Liberal. Newt’s desperation is driving him over the edge. He is becoming more and more erratic in his actions and in his speech. The man needs mental help!

  • mikelindell2

    The most electable is the guy who has previously solved the problems facing the country now. Under Newt, 4.2% unemployment, 11 million new jobs, balanced budgets including surpluses, entitlement reform, things actually getting done in DC. What’s the point of voting for Mitt, he won’t solve anything and is just as liberal as Obama. His record of being 47th in the nation in job creation as governor won’t impress anyone in the general, and just wait for the firestorm over his years of unreleased tax returns. Let’s hope there are people who aren’t brainwashed sheep like the two above.

  • mikelindell2

    Raised taxes on guns 400%, pro-abortion, raised business taxes by 700 million, preempted Obama in instituting Obamacare, has said he will only repeal parts of Obamacare, proposals are timid at best. Hmmmm, sounds liberal to me

  • In The Hook

    Why is he getting annihilated in every single poll out there? I think it’s a very fair argument that “electability” is a tough argument to make because polls fluctuate, but Romney’s standing heads up versus Obama has changed little. Gingrich had a bit of a surge at one point but he’s been behind Obama by double-digits fairly regularly.

    Totally fair to get after Romney on his flip-flopping and being definitely to the left of the base no matter what he tries to portray. Totally fair to be right irritated about Romneycare. I’m not a fan of it either. Totally fine to argue that we need a conservative candidate and Romney isn’t terribly conservative. But don’t go down this rabbit hole regarding Gingrich being more electable. It’s just counterfactual.

  • mikelindell2

    You’re right, Newt has beaten Obama in numerous polls. That was just a month ago, so obviously things change quickly so imagine what they’ll look like in nine months. The difference is Newt has a record and proposals to run on. He can attract voters, Romney can only stay where he is. The only way he’s doing well in FL is by spending $16mil against Newt, not talking about himself because he has nothing to offer. John Kerry is Romney, and Kerry lost. Do we want to run Mccain ,then turn around and run Romney, then after romney loses wonder what the point of nominating someone who isn’t a consrrvative or even a republican was? Then we’ll all swear we’ll run a real conservative in 2016, but the lasting damage will be done.

  • gracie

    Yes I know I don’t have the right to tell you how to vote. But your vote will count more than mine as mine isw two0 monts away!!

    You however have a chance to increase the time. Look at what we discussed thiws weekend regarding Romney>Bain>Damon!! How are you going to feel if this is the tip of the iceberg and we find out even more about Romney??

    At least Newt will get out the base and will have coattails. There is NO WAY you can say this about Romney! People will stay home in droves!

    PLEASE re-think this.