Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 04:15 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 8 words, total size 1 kb.

For your reading and debating pleasure, here's a list of 9 Movie Nude Scenes we Could've Done Without from Film.com.

You're welcome. more...

Posted by: Open Blog at 06:08 PM | Add Comment
Post contains 50 words, total size 1 kb.

Earlier today I wrote that the President told an outright lie and failed Econ 101 when he claimed that only polluters would be paying the energy tax. Now, via PowerLineBlog comes this map showing how much the Waxman-Markey cap-and-tax bill will cost:

Consumers and taxpayers will be on the hook for millions of dollars under Waxman-Markey's allowance formula. Except in places like California (which incidentally emits the most greenhouse gases of any state), where folks will see a benefit. I'm gonna enjoy having you guys paying my electric bills, chumps!

John from PowerLine gets it mostly right:

Waxman-Markey would be a very stupid bill even if it were true that 1) the earth is getting warmer, 2) human activity is mostly responsible for climate changes, and 3) a warmer earth would be a bad thing. Given that all three of these premises are false--we cannot, in fact, control the weather--Waxman-Markey is a suicidal monument to human folly.

More than that, there is no evidence that Waxman-Markey will alter emissions levels enough to even be noticeable globally. While U.S. emissions are not tiny, they are a drop in a bucket compared to natural source emissions of greenhouse gases. Cap-and-tax does nothing except hamstring our economy and make environmentalists feel good. Honestly, I'd rather spend millions doing the opposite.

More: And if you're into this kinda thing, Newt Gingrich talked about cap and tax on the Hugh Hewitt show today. You can catch a stream or a podcast here.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 05:10 PM | Comments (6)
Post contains 270 words, total size 2 kb.

Caption by AP: This May 2006 photo provided by art teacher Judith Cohen shows her sitting in front of cardboard boxes in a rubber room, in New York. Hundreds of public school teachers in New York accused of offenses ranging from insubordination to sexual misconduct, have been banished to adult detention centers known as rubber rooms, where the city can keep an eye on them, paying them their full salaries of $70,000 or $80,000 a year to essentially do nothing. Cohen says she has been waiting in a rubber room, or reassignment center since May 2006. Cohen, an art teacher, says she passes the time by painting watercolors of her fellow detainees. She is 'awaiting a decision from my hearing which was over April 21, 2009. And here I sit, waiting, and waiting and waiting...'

700 NYC teachers are being so punished.

What can you say? The teachers' union claims to be all about the kids, but I notice that its agenda seems to only about extracting more money from taxpayers and protecting grossly deficient and even criminal teachers from even being fired from their jobs.

Thanks to EdwardR.

Posted by: Ace at 01:16 PM | Add Comment
Post contains 229 words, total size 2 kb.

Not to claim credit for doing nothing or anything, but by the way, I deserve all the credit for doing nothing.

bama's approach to Iran, including his assertion that the unrest there represents a debate among Iranians unrelated to the United States, is an acknowledgment that a U.S. president's words have a limited ability to alter foreign events in real time and could do more harm than good. But privately Obama advisers are crediting his Cairo speech for inspiring the protesters, especially the young ones, who are now posing the most direct challenge to the republic's Islamic authority in its 30-year history.

One senior administration official with experience in the Middle East said, "There clearly is in the region a sense of new possibilities," adding that "I was struck in the aftermath of the president's speech that there was a connection. It was very sweeping in terms of its reach."

In related news, a protester tore the mask off the "U-Boat Ghost" that had been haunting Iran, revealing it to be none other than Old Man Khamenei, who wanted to drive down the property value of Iran so he could turn it into a ghost-themed amusement park.

Old Man Khamenei then said, "And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for that meddling administration."

By the Way: Here is what Obama specifically said about Iran in the Cairo speech:

This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is in fact a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I've made it clear to Iran's leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question now is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build.

I recognize it will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude, and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America's interests. It's about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path.

I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nation holds nuclear weapons. And that's why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. (Applause.) And any nation -- including Iran -- should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I'm hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal.

The only reference to democracy concerns apologizing for the US' role in overthrowing a "democratically elected" government. Other references include multiple affirmations that Iran's "leaders" are in fact its leaders, pledges of "mutual respect," and a commitment to working with Iran's "leaders" without "preconditions" of any sort. Preconditions that a democratically-minded president might insist upon, like reform of the corrupt, fixed system and a system of actual representative government.

Everything Obama said about Iran actually flattered and legitimized its "leaders," as he termed them. And yet, we are supposed to believe, he actually inspired the protests.

He did, of course, address democracy broadly (see the "fourth point"). But when specifically discussing Iraq, he supported the regime and buttressed its legitimacy. Further, every president -- including George Bush, and yeah, Bill Clinton too -- speaks broadly about the need for democracy in the Islamic world. I am a bit perplexed at Obama's curious belief that he alone put the right words together to inspire change.

Even AP Notices: Comparing Obama's heavily-caveated "condemnations" as "hands on" and "hands off" in alternating sentences.

It's not just that Obama is tepid, feckless, anti-democratic, appeasing, cowardly, and weak. That's his, well, that's his foreign policy. He has chosen this foreign policy, deliberately, pre-meditatedly, and with malice aforethought.

The galling thing is that, having chosen this path, he also wants credit for Reaganite boldness and unwavering moral conviction in the face of evil.

Posted by: Ace at 12:01 PM | Add Comment
Post contains 876 words, total size 6 kb.

There's a bit of a dust up today about Huffington Post's Nico Pitney getting an invite to the White House press conference today with the assurance he'd get to ask a question.

Frankly, I don't get it.

Pitney has been doing yeoman's work on Iran. This isn't news to anyone following the story. Obviously the White House noticed it and reached out to a reporter/blogger who would normally not be at an event like this (though I imagine he could have gotten a credential if he'd asked).

Yeah, it's a little clubby to basically give a guy a guarantee that he'd get to ask a question but so what? Obama can call on whomever he wants. He knows before he goes out there who he will pick, so what's the big deal? Yes, Obama also knew it was very likely that Pitney would ask about Iran. Again, so what? It was the story of the day and has been for a week. Now, if Obama had knowledge of what the question was, that would be different but I haven't seen anyone claim that.

This strikes me as a little bit of guild jealousy. The White House press corps may think they are the only ones qualified to ask tough questions but clearly they aren't.

Pitney asked a question submitted by a reader in Iran that was totally legit.

Under which conditions would you accept the election of Ahmadinejad? And if you do accept it without any significant changes in the conditions there, isn't that a betrayal of -- of what the demonstrators there are working to achieve

Obama's answer was telling...he punted by saying it was up to the Iranians to decide. Well yes and no. They are 'debating' that now but the US is free to make an independent judgment and base its interests and actions accordingly. Again, Obama took a pass and was very passive. That was telling.

Let's be honest Pitney has done more on this story than most msm reporters. I don't see the big deal in letting him follow it up this way.

Plus, when the next Republican President invites Ace to ask a question, we can point to this example and tell the left to stick it.

Posted by: DrewM at 11:08 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 403 words, total size 2 kb.

Steven Hayes of the Weekly Standard points out the weakness of Obama's wait and see attitude on Iran.

Obama doesn't see this popular movement as a moment of opportunity but rather a distraction in his desperate attempt to get the Iranians to the table, picnic or negotiating, whatever works for them.

While the President's words may have been tougher, he did 'condemn' the violence, his overall attitude felt weak, almost as if he were pleading with the Iranian government to get this over with so we can get back to what Obama wants to talk about.

The arrogance of Obama's position is that he thinks he knows what the regime should prize most, international legitimacy and direct talks with the US leading to their surrender of their nuclear program. It doesn't seem to occur to him that the mullahs may have other priorities, like regime and personal survival with their nuclear program intact. On that front, Obama has nothing to offer them and they now see he won't even slap at them weekly (no hot dogs for you!), so he's really not in the game. Sadly, he shows no desire to get into it either.

Posted by: DrewM at 10:45 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 203 words, total size 1 kb.

I managed to watch most of the presser online and just wanted to highlight a few outright lies.

(1) When the President claims that cap and tax will be paid for only by polluters, implying that it will not have an impact on the economy, he fails Economics 101. Polluters, aka producers of goods and services, aren't going to magic up the money to pay for cap and trade out of nowhere. That money will be felt by consumers (and by every entity in the chain of commerce between the first cap-and-taxed company and the consumer). Prices will rise. The President's intimation that they won't is an outright lie.

(2) Obama stated that healthcare is "the primary driver of federal deficits." This is an outright lie. In fact, in 2008, the federal government spent $600,121,000,000 on healthcare (Medicare, Medicaid). That's 20.4% of the $2.93 trillion spent last year. By contrast, the government spent $615,256,000,000--20.9%--on social security. The government spent $607,863,000,000--20.7%--on national defense.

Perhaps the President meant that healthcare will become the primary driver of federal deficits if Congress passes his $1 trillion plan (although, the spendulus gives it stiff competition, counting interest payments).

(3) As I expected, the President tried to claim that he had not reversed himself on Iran by adopting a firmer stance. It's true that he is trying to have it both ways--condemning violence for us, but hoping that Ahmadinejad will see his tepid response for what it is. As expected, Obama used his favorite phrase "As I said last week" to claim that he hasn't changed his stance in response to criticism. The fact is, his statement "last week" came on Saturday--long after most of the Western world had already condemned the Iranian government and long after Congress and many Americans had condemned the President for being chill with brutal dictatorship.

(4) This last is just because I'm a little punchy. But Obama claimed once again to be a "former smoker." That must be a new euphemism for "one who smokes not every day and not around family" because that's what he said immediately after claiming to be a former smoker.

Aside from Obama's lies, he engaged in typical political exagerations throughout. It was especially egregious when he feigned ignorance about the effect a public healthcare option would have on private insurers.

The only other noteworthy moment I saw was during the last question when he talked about Iran failing to live up to "international norms of freedom of speech; freedom of expression." Helen Thomas, Harpy-emeritus of the White House Press Corp, screeched from off camera and off mic: "What about the Iraq photos?!?!" I assume that she's referring to photographs of dead troops and abuses at Abu Ghraib, which the Obama Administration (like Bush 43) has been loath to release.

Oh yeah: His Arrogance Obama, First of His Name, Master of All He Surveys and Muncher of Fine Arugula snotted that "Congress can do what it's going to do" but that "I'm the President, and I'm going to run my office the way I see fit." He was responding to quoted criticism from John McCain. It was a reprise of his earlier sneering "I won" delivered, apparently, whenever McCain's or Bush 43's names come up.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 09:12 AM | Comments (1)
Post contains 548 words, total size 3 kb.

I haven't used the word 'coup' for what the Republicans did just over two weeks ago, since they did it with a majority of votes.

This however? This is a coup.

In a surprise move, Democrats filed into the Senate chamber this afternoon and took control of the rostrum for the first time since June 8, when a historic Republican-backed coup seemingly broke their majority.

The 31 senators took their seats and put Sen. Andrea Stewart Cousins (D-Yonkers) on the podium. The press was blocked from entering and watched events unfold through windows.

Right now the Senate is deadlocked at 31 but the last time leadership was voted on it was done with a majority of 32. I don't see how 31 overrules 32.

Now the Republicans tried to hold session last week but when they held a quorum call they only had 31 votes and could not transact any business, the Democrats are in the same position.

What it seems the Democrats are trying to do is take possession of the chamber. The Governor has exercised his constitutional authority and called a Special Session for 3:00, the Republicans then called one for 2:00. Democrats are trying to beat them to the punch as to who physically holds the gavel.

UPDATE: Session has started. Sort of. They did the prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance (I think) and now there's a Democrat in the chair but nothing is happening.

UPDATE 2: The Democratic leader who says he's in charge just announced that they aren't doing anything because Paterson hasn't set up the bills he wants acted on.

He's the one who called this farce and doesn't have the bills ready?

Related...the Senate Sergent at Arms physically blocked the Republican from taking the chair so the Republic 'presided' from the well with a Democrat looking over him from the chair.

No, there are no grown ups in NYS government. Thanks for asking.
I don't know how this will end but I have my hopes.... more...

Posted by: DrewM at 08:56 AM | Comments (8)
Post contains 371 words, total size 3 kb.

We are fortunate that He will be gracing us with His presence in about 5 minutes.

A lot to chew over. Expect more soon...

Basic takeaway on Iran...Claims there's not change in tone of his statements (there is), won't say what consequences there might be for outreach effort (there won't be any), Iranian diplomats will still be welcome at US embassies on July 4th.

He's talking tougher but doesn't seem to mean it. There's no consequences for what's happened to date. Just words.

Awful, just awful.

Dog that didn't bark...Several commenters have pointed out no North Korean questions. Thankfully though we did get smoking, Chile and black unemployment.

I'm switching to the most recent on top...

Nope 2 more...question about black unemployment.

Last one...Question about Neda. He saw the video says it's "heartbreaking", finally something I can agree with him about.

Do you have a concern that the movement is dying? Yes. He's concerned about people not being able to have their voices heard. "We are watching". He keeps talking about 'justice'. I wish someone had asked him what he thinks that means.

Dear God, is this almost over? My guess is yes, he's hitting his economy, energy, education talking points. Sounds like a wrap.

Do we need a second "stimulus" package. Obama says no body knew how bad the recession would be...I guess he hasn't seen Geoff's chart. Says unemployment will go over 10%

Something about South America and meeting with Chilean President. Unrelated...Chile is an awesome country. Go there if you get the chance. Interesting he goes on about relationship with Chile, their great economic policies etc...he ignores we have a free trade agreement which helped make all of that happen. How about doing more of that? Why not support the Colombian FTA?

Says Brazilian Pres Lu Lu has a different political philosophy than "most Americans". Noticed he didn't say 'from me' Even Obama just called Lu Lu a 'leftist'.

Asks Obama about his smoking habit. Um, ok. He ducks and attacks Mclatchey for making it about him. Wow, this is awesome. He's prickly to say the least. No wonder they did this mid-day. In prime time it would have been a disaster. So much for his unrivaled cool factor.

Obama plays the 'it's early card' (again) on public option. Now he's going on about how the public plan will serve as a model for private insurers. Yeah, gov't is always more efficient than private businesses. Any way, another filibuster....

Tapper says, could you answer the public option question, Tapper mocks the Obama as Spock thing. Awesome.

Wow, this is really testy. He won't answer about potential consequences saying it hasn't played out yet.

Obama is testy today. Reed asked if there was any news in this statement. He calls on Chuck Todd.

Chip Reed...follows up on Garret's question, points out language has changed. Asked if he was influenced by McCain/Graham. Obama laughs it off, talks about 'justice' not freedom. Obama points out Iranian gov't is lying about US involvement. Doesn't that beg the question...why not speak out anyway? They are going to lie about it anyway by Obama's own admission.

He doesn't get why a public option would drive private insurers out of business. Is he lying or just clueless?

Still going about health care. We might get him more interested in Iran if we could convince him that the people in Iran weren't rallying for their country but demanding government run health care.

His non-Iranian answers are so long and rambling. It's like back in the old days when DJ's needed to take a dump they'd play American Pie or Stairway to Heaven.

Health care...will you sign a bill without a public option. He's now going into a long set of talking points we've all heard before and will hear again on ABC's infomercial.

Major Garret asked 'what took so long' to be 'appaled'. The left is going to go nuts over that question. Obama is now defending his approach. It was a wasted question, honestly. The State Department cookouts would have been better.

Ah, he followed with that. Obama dodges, says we don't have relations with them and we'd like to 'heal wounds' Basically, it's a 'choice the Iranians will have to make' Unfucking believable. more...

Posted by: DrewM at 07:25 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 1010 words, total size 6 kb.