Isaac Hunter Kicks Butt
If you're not reading Laura Leslie's blog at WUNC-FM, you should be. It's the sharpest coverage of statewide politics coming out of the Capital Press Corpse by a wide margin. Her report on Friday of the Four Horsemen in the Replicant race for governor is a work of art. I've chosen the "cons" for highlights here, but the whole thing is worth the read.
Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory:
Cons: The ability to work with Democrats is great in the general election, but it may do more harm than good with the GOP base. If this gubernatorial primary is anything like the last two, the Republicans who show up will be a lot more interested in conservative credentials than bipartisan appeal. And about that transfer tax . . .State Senator Fred Smith:
Cons: The roundtable format is not his forte. He’s much better at orating behind a podium than at engaging his opponents eye-to-eye. He came off as overeager, angry, even truculent, as he went after McCrory and Graham time after time. On the other hand, you can’t fault him for his fightin’ mood, given the polls that showed him losing ground to McCrory before the latter even entered the race.Former state Supreme Court Justice Bob Orr:
Cons: As far as his own message goes, it wasn’t his best night. Got lost in the shuffle, and within his own answers, too, sometimes, lacking specifics on how he'd implement his long-term ideas. And with McCrory’s entry, he’s no longer the only positive candidate. In fact, he may have a lot in common with McCrory, especially in terms of policy, which could make it tough for Orr to hold onto the small niche he's managed to carve out for himself.Salisbury attorney/gas-tax activist Bill Graham:
Cons: Pretty much disappeared in the shadow of the drama between McCrory and Smith. Probably didn’t pick up much new support, thanks to his negativity. If life in NC was that bad, we wouldn’t need the new roads he wants to build, because everyone would be moving away, not in. Then there was his solution to drought: not conservation or policy changes, but consumer “watermaking technology” that’s “been available for several years.” (For a minute there, I thought I was watching Dune. Or maybe Living with Ed. ) . . . Rob Christensen says he won. I’m not sure I understand why.
My prediction: It'll come down to McCrory and Smith, with the Asphalt King pulling it out when the hard-core conservatives turn out in spades for the uninspiring contest.
- James's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
Graham
I don't understand Rob Christensen's enthusiasm for Bill Graham's performance either. Something weird about that conclusion, especially in light of that "water-making" claim. Laura's comment about Dune is hilarious.
Which new technology?
What new "watermaking" technology was Bill Graham talking about, and where did he learn of it?
Stillsuits? (Dune)
Interdimensional portals to an alternate universe? (Discworld)
Buckets of water flung by tornado-traveling Kansans?
(Wizard of Oz)
Hmmmm....
Dan Besse
Democrat for Lieutenant Governor
www.danbesse2008.org
Dancing with Wolves and Billy Graham
What new "watermaking" technology was Bill Graham talking about, and where did he learn of it?* Puzzle Lt Gov candiate along with millions of North Carolina voters
No doubt candiate Graham has discover 21 st century techology and has put it to work by hiring the Cherokee Indian Nation for his campaign, along with Snoopy and the Red Barron to drop icecubes supply by the Motel 6 ice machines.
One Republican candiate who remains unname said candiate Graham was pissing into the wind and thinking it was rain...
Political Rap dancing in the 21st Century
Once upon a time, shamans danced to bring the rains. Now we send pilots into the clouds, bearing a sacrifice of silver iodide.
Okay, so there's a bit more science to cloud seeding than rain dancing. But despite being around for decades, the mainstream scientific community's still skeptical.
Why? In part because it's so difficult to do rigorous, double-blind, case-controlled studies on something so variable and long-term and poorly understood as the weather itself.
While researching the possibility of using cloud seeding in the drought-stricken southeast, I ended up talking to Joe Golden, a researcher who'd actually seeded clouds in Florida. He told me about the experiment, run by Bill Woodley in the late 1970's, designed to confirm an earlier experiment that suggested cloud seeding success.
Over the course of an entire season, pilots took to the skies at every sign of rainclouds; they wouldn't know until they delivered their load whether it was silver iodide or sand. But one of the placebo days also happened to fall on a day of widespread torrential downpours. It swamped the experiment. Take that day out, said Golden, and the cloud seeding was a success; keep it, and it's not clear whether it worked.
Golden thought the result was encouraging; the scientific community didn't. And that's the thing about weather seeding: the split between mainstream scientists and the people who are doing it. The field has grown in the skies, but not the academy. There are community- and state-sponsored cloud seeding projects in Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, North Dakota and Texas. But they're not in a position to do research, at least not to rigorous academic standards: they're in business, after all. The pilots can't afford to donate their time, and their clients don't want to waste potential rainfall on a double-blind experiment.
But there's enough out there -- biological research, observational research -- to suggest that cloud seeding really does work. There's also new cloud-seeding agents that allow ice crystals -- the baby phase of raindrops -- to form at a wider range of temperatures than before, meaning more types of clouds can be seeded more types of clouds. And countries like China aren't spending a hundred million dollars on weather modification for the sheer pleasure of it.
Sometimes rain dances work.
John Hood's take on the Four Horsemen
Is a little less interesting, but still worth the read.
Poor Fred Smith. Hood had a whole paragraph to talk about the Asphalt King and had nothing good to say.
James
PS Note that Hood's column is extremely short in the "con" department, unlike Laura's excellent and balanced assessment. Can't wait until his column tomorrow to see how he handles Perdue and Moore.
Mr. Orr protests
He wonders why I didn't include the "pros" from Laura Leslie's original post, and pointed me to his own discussion of the debate, which you can find here. Check it out. He does have a way with words.
My reply to Bob:
hilarious
I wont vote for him, but this is awesome:
"Keep the Faith"
Wrong debate
Sorry folks, I linked to the wrong debate on Bob's blog. Here's his take on the WRAL debate.
Orr is on my blog-reader. Mostly I find his posts...
to be articulate and full of wonderings about why the press doesn't cover him. Sound familiar.
One of the pitfalls of childhood is that one doesn't have to understand something to feel it. - Carlos Ruiz Zafon