Mitt Romney Shines In Florida Primary

Image via WikipediaIn the land of sunshine and hurricanes, retirees and disgruntled victims of the Great Recession, Mitt Romney blew past Newt Gingrich to win this week's Republican primary in Florida.  The former governor of Massachusetts was rewarded with fifty delegates in the winner-take-all contest.

After Gingrich unexpectedly won in South Carolina, Romney had a comeback of his own prior to the primary in holding a double digit lead in the polls over the former House Speaker.  It's now mostly about those two, with Rick Santorum and Ron Paul sitting this one out to concentrate on states with caucuses.

Romney had a better outcome at the two televised debates, beating Gingrich at his own game.  It also didn't help Newt that he could no longer use the media as a punching bag, after turning CNN's John King into a wimp at a South Carolina debate.

First Brian Williams, who moderated NBC's debate in Tampa, told the live audience to keep quiet, depriving network viewers of witnessing Newt unleashed.  Then at the CNN get-together, Wolf Blitzer stood up to Gingrich with a probing question about recent statements he made.

Gingrich has vowed to take his candidacy all the way to the GOP nominating convention in Tampa this summer, harping on Romney's unsuitability as the man to beat President Barack Obama because he's become too liberal for an increasingly conservative party.  But that message will be more difficult to get out because Gingrich lacks any of Romney's money and organizational skills.  And the Republican establishment has Romney's back, fearing a landslide in November should Gingrich somehow become the nominee.

We mentioned before that Santorum and Paul were already campaigning in states with caucuses.  Well, one of those states is Minnesota, and that one will be next Tuesday.  Don't say you weren't warned.

A "Stronger" State of the Union

Image via WikipediaRepublican presidential candidates have been debating so often (they just had one Monday night on NBC) that it's easy to forget President Barack Obama is running for re-election.  Tuesday night, he got to set his own agenda before a joint session of Congress and a worldwide TV audience.

The President's State of the Union address was a mostly upbeat affair, emphasizing that Osama bin Laden was dead and General Motors (recipients of a government bailout) is back on top.  Soldiers are no longer fighting in Iraq, and the war in Afghanistan is winding down.  As a result, the President said the state of the union is "getting stronger".

Seeing the economy improve in spite of high unemployment levels, Obama made several proposals to level the playing field between the haves and have-nots--most of which were met with a cool reception by Republicans.  He wanted an economy that was "built to last", just like how Detroit used to make cars.

One thing Obama advocated was the Buffett Rule (named for Warren, not Jimmy), asking the rich to pay tax rates equal to that of the middle class.  Buffett's secretary, who was used as an example, just happened to be sitting in First Lady Michelle Obama's box.

Another special guest was Gabrielle Giffords, who resigned as Arizona's Democratic congresswoman to continue recovering from her assassination attempt of a year ago.  The only surprise here is what took her so long.

Obama is making a slight improvement in his approval ratings, though not in the way he's handling the economy.  The polls also show that Congress is doing much worse.  That's why Obama really needed the State of the Union address to jack up his chances for re-election.  Because if he doesn't, somebody else could be doing this next year.

Three Primaries, Three Winners

Image via WikipediaFormer House speaker Newt Gingrich has risen from the political grave once again, winning the Republican presidential primary in South Carolina over favorite Mitt Romney.  When you consider what went on in the past week, maybe what happened Saturday wasn't as much of an upset as the pundits believed it was.

First, the GOP field has been whittled from six to four--Gingrich, Romney, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul.  Jon Huntsmann, who apparently decided there's room for only one former Governor who happens to be a Mormon, gave up and now supports Romney.  Texas Governor Rick Perry came to the same conclusion, but only after he shot himself in the foot so often on the campaign trail that he ran out of bullets.  Perry moved his support to Gingrich.

It has not been a good week for Romney.  First, his win at the Iowa caucuses was rescinded and given to Santorum, which means he's only won next-door neighbor New Hampshire's primary.  Then came questions about his days as a venture capitalist for Bain Capital, which included an ABC report that said he and the private equity firm had been stashing away money on the Cayman Islands.  Romney has also yet to release his tax returns, as all candidates must do.  We figure he'll only do so if it's to his political advantage.

Romney is still considered the front-runner with the best chance of beating President Barack Obama in November, but no one seems to like him much.  Conservatives, especially evangelicals, don't care for his Mormonism or his flip-flops on some of their issues.  Progressives believe Romney's too rich and too remote to identify much with average people.

Enter Gingrich.  His status soared in a state that's more conservative than Iowa and New Hampshire as Romney's has fallen.  Gingrich did well in the two South Carolina debates, mostly because he was blasting the media's reporting of his past marital infidelities, which includes ABC's interview with ex-wife Marianne that aired just before the primary.  He's apparently hoping that voters don't care so much about a candidate's sexual track record as they once did.

Gingrich can lambaste the media all he wants, but the truth is he needs them.  He doesn't have the money, the organization nor the support of mainstream Republicans to compete with Romney.  But thanks to the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling (which marked its second anniversary this week), he doesn't have to.

Under the ruling, any anonymous donor (corporate or otherwise) can fund a Super PAC which can churn out enough negative advertising against Romney to keep Gingrich and Santorum in business longer than they have any right to be.  The only catch is that the candidates must not be involved.

Next stop is Florida on January 31.  Another opportunity to write off Gingrich's chances of stopping Romney's inevitable march to the Republican nomination.  But that's what everybody said about South Carolina, and look what happened.

SOPA, Not Good

Image by future15pic via FlickrThere are two bills going through Congress right now that would have the ability to change the Internet as we know it.  And not in a good way, as its detractors would have you believe.

The House's Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Senate's Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) would outlaw pirating copyrighted materials over the Internet.  Both measures are supported by most of the big entertainment companies.  They also happen to own most of the news organizations, which is probably why you haven't heard much about this until now.

In protest, Wikipedia and other sites shut down all day Wednesday.  A few others blacked out some of their material, as if they were declassified CIA documents, to illustrate why Internet freedom is so important.  It keeps them in business, for one thing.

We understand why the likes of Disney and News Corporation (the owners of Fox and its networks) don't want knockoffs of their content turning up in China, or being used on others' websites without compensation.  What we don't understand is how the two bills were so broadly written, leaving the possibility that one claim of copyright infringement could shut down an otherwise innocent website.

The greatest threat to Internet freedom doesn't just come from proposed anti-piracy laws, but from companies such as The New York Times setting up paywalls on sites that used to be free.  If you can't afford the access, then you can't use the information.

We have often wondered what would happen if government took control of the Internet, which originally began as part of the military.  There'd be censorship, yes.  There would also be the United States Postal Service instead of Microsoft and Google handling e-mails and texting, and charging for them as a way to solve its financial problems.

Forgive us if this sounds like a glaring case of self-interest, but do you really want to go back to the days of writing checks, shopping in a catalog, taping music and TV shows on a recorder, and writing your innermost thoughts to the editor of the local newspaper?  That's all stuff you used to do before the Internet came along.

Those of us who remember when Bill Clinton was elected President and Seattle was better known for grunge music than coffee can handle going back to the way things were.  Those of you who don't remember will think that Armageddon has arrived, with all those laptops and smartphones rendered useless because of the passage of SOPA.  Well, maybe you can make a phone call . . .

Supreme Court Decides The Future of TV.

Image via WikipediaThe Supreme Court is currently deciding if the Federal Communications Commission should be in the business of censoring nudity and profanity on broadcast TV.

The issue here is the FCC's inconsistency when it comes to applying broadcast standards to an industry that's struggling to compete with cable.  They can fine networks for showing exposed female nipples at the Super Bowl, celebrities uttering f-bombs on awards shows, and for merely putting Howard Stern on the air.  But they did allow ABC to run the World War II movie "Saving Private Ryan" uncensored, prompting some of the network's stations to pull it for fear of getting a hefty fine.  There's also NBC's telecast of the film "Schindler's List", which includes scenes of naked people in a concentration camp about to take a "shower".  (It seems that if your name is Steven Spielberg, who produced both movies, you can get away with almost anything.)

This was a case just waiting to happen, even if it's argued before a body that doesn't allow cameras into its courtroom.  (Not that we're advocating it.)  Judging from early reports, some of the justices don't seem to watch much TV.  And Chief Justice John Roberts is the only one on the bench with young children.

This is 2012, folks.  Not 1962.  The rules made sense back in the days when there were only three or four channels, and "The Beverly Hillbillies" was the top-rated program on TV.  Now more than half of the population get their TV from cable or satellite, with its hundreds of channels that are indistinguishable, unless you also subscribe to HBO or Showtime.  There you can get all the swear words, sex and nudity you want.

That's why broadcast TV, which is government regulated while cable is not, thinks it can't compete because they have to dumb down their shows with bleeping, blurred-out body parts, and dancing around certain subjects.

Not only that, but cable has gotten a lot better at producing original shows that people will actually watch (and that includes "Jersey Shore", "The Real Housewives of . . . ", and the Kardashians).  Broadcasters who can't afford a "Mad Men" or "Boardwalk Empire" have to make do with lower-cost reality shows while watching its viewers go elsewhere.

The purpose of broadcast standards, of course, is so that parents don't have to explain to their kids what the s-word or the f-word is, or what two people do in a bedroom besides sleeping.  Chances are real good that Our Precious Children already know this stuff, and they didn't get it from watching TV.  Instead, they either surf the Web or hear about it from their friends at school. 

What the justices are asked to rule on come spring has less to do with upholding the nation's morals as it does with deciding the future of broadcast television.  A ruling in favor of the FCC means one more nail in the coffin for TV stations, as viewers and revenues flee towards cable.  It will also prove that upholding broadcast standards is as archaic as the Supreme Court itself.

Romney By A Nose In Iowa

Image by Getty Images via @daylifeIf there's one bad habit that Iowans have learned from Minnesotans, it's having elections that are decided by only a few votes.  Mitt Romney won the Iowa Republican caucus Tuesday by a mere eight votes over Rick Santorum.  Libertarian Ron Paul finished third.  Since these three split more than 70 percent of the vote, all of them claimed victory.  No recount is planned, so far as we know.

Romney did very well for someone who didn't campaign much in Iowa until the final few weeks.  Santorum appealed to the Christian conservatives who thought he had a lot less baggage than the other guys did.  And Paul was treated like a political rock star by the youth of the Hawkeye state, but his views are considered too "out there" by the GOP mainstream.

Let's talk about Santorum for a moment.  Until now, the former Pennsylvania senator had been ignored by most of the media, bloggers (including this one) and the other candidates.  But in the spinning wheel of political fortune that's been this campaign so far, Santorum's number just came up.  Now he'll be perused not just for his conservative views, but also for various allegations of ethical impropriety while he was in the Senate.

As for the also-rans, Newt Gingrich was done in by negative TV ads produced by pro-Romney PACs that played all over Iowa.  Gingrich is also proving to be a bitter old man when he called Romney a "liar" on TV.  Governor Rick Perry went back to Texas to reassess his campaign, only to continue it a few hours later.  And Michele Bachmann has called it quits.

The Minnesota congresswoman was hoping for a miracle in her native Iowa, but she finished dead last.  Bachmann's campaign, which flowered when she won the state straw poll back in August, had wilted the moment fellow Tea Party favorite Perry entered the race.  She had become better known for screwing up her facts than for having any ideas outside wanting to make Barack Obama a One. Term. President.  Her staff ditched out in droves.  The real miracle was that Bachmann lasted this long.  Now her political future is in question.

The circus moves on to New Hampshire, where Romney's a near-lock to win there, considering he used to be governor of next-door Massachusetts.  Things might get more interesting after that in South Carolina, where Gingrich, Santorum and Perry should do better with a more conservative electorate

That Was Now, This Is K-Twin

As 2012 debuted, so did another radio station in the Twin Cities.  KTWN (96.3 FM) moved from being a hits-driven station for teenagers to a hits-driven station for their parents.

The station, previously known as KHTC, failed twice to put a dent in contemporary hits behemoth KDWB's (101.3 FM) numbers.  First they were KTTB (B96), the Twin Cities' first full-time hip hop station.  Then, when the Pohlad family's Northern Lights Broadcasting took over, it became 96.3 Now, a more dance-oriented version of what KDWB had been playing.

It's just another notch on the belt for Clear Channel-owned KDWB, which has been in the Top 40 business since going on the air in 1959 at AM 630 (now WREY).  They've vanquished many a competitor over the years, including WDGY (1130), WYOO (whose FM signal KDWB took over when the station was sold in the 1970s), KSTP-AM and WLOL-FM.  Now they have the format to themselves once more.

The new K-Twin, whose name was previously used for a well-remembered (but low-rated) soft jazz station at 107.9 FM (now KQQL), plays tunes from the likes of Adele, Maroon 5 and Rob Thomas that sounds more like Cities 97 than KS95.  K-Twin's tagline is "Your Town, Your Friends, Your Hits", as if it's a shot at the corporate-owned competitors across the dial taking their cues from New York or Atlanta.

KTWN is also providing a second source of income for KARE (Channel 11) weekend news anchor Eric Perkins, who's co-hosting morning drive with Tony Fly.  Apparently, the NBC affiliate's owner Gannett's been cutting salaries, which explains why fellow KARE anchor Mike Pomeranz is moonlighting as a host on Fox Sports North.  Which makes you wonder what Julie Nelson does in her spare time.

One wonders how long the new K-Twin format will last, given these factors:  (A) They don't have much of a signal, which means it can't be heard in some parts of the metro.  (B) The perception in radioland that the Pohlads might sell KTWN, or use it to bring family-owned Minnesota Twins games to the station in 2013.  (C)  How long they can keep up the playlist without sounding like everybody else.  Or maybe they've lost that battle already.  At least until the next format change.

2012: The Beginning of The End?

Image by kymioflario via FlickrWelcome to 2012.  If the Mayan Calendar is to be believed, this may be the last year of our lives.

If all comes to pass on Wednesday, December 12, something--we don't know what--will destroy the planet we live on.  If you've seen "2012" and "The Day After Tomorrow", don't say you weren't warned.

How you react to this event varies, depending on your situation.  If you're graduating from high school or college, plan on getting married, have a new job, starting a family or win the lottery, then this is not what you want to hear.  Conversely, if you are unemployed, are not in good health, are forced to live out of your car, and your significant other has run off with the hedge fund manager, then the apocalypse can't come soon enough.

There's also the possibility that the disaster of 12/12/12 could just be a false alarm.  Remember Harold Camping, the Christian radio host who predicted the end of the world last year--twice?  This year also marks the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the United States and the Soviet Union nearly came to nuclear blows over missiles in Castro-land.  Oh, and it's been ten years since the September 11, 2001 attacks.  It only seemed like the end of the world back then.

But to hear Ryan Seacrest and Jenny McCarthy talk about the looming apocalypse as the big ball dropped on New York's Times Square, and Tina Fey and Alec Baldwin suggesting that we might want to go out laughing as they promote NBC's Thursday comedy lineup during "Sunday Night Football" . . . Well, that kind of sets the tone for what 2012 will be all about, doesn't it?

As December 12 approaches, there's not much you can do in preparing to meet your doom.  All the fallout shelters in the world have been turned into overpriced, underground condos (and even if they still exist, they wouldn't do you much good anyway).  Just go about your business, think about what you've accomplished in life, and say your goodbyes when the time comes.

Of course, if we're all still here on December 13, then so much the better.  They'll just pick another date for the world to end.  Hopefully not any time soon.