I didn't post this when I got tipped to it the other day because I thought it was fake. Apparently (content warning) it's real.

Pictures of a sexy Christmas party she attended -- dressed in Santa hat and thigh-highs, sucking on a dildo-nose of a guy dressed up as a priapic Rudolf -- were leaked, and they're (content warning) sort of odd.

Now the guy turns out to have been her husband at some point, so, I guess, well, whatever. I don't really want to make a huge point about this either way. It's not like she's a genuine threat.

Oh, and her name is, uh, Krystal Ball, but she is not a stripper, despite her parents' apparent determination that she should be.

She actually had a point about this:

"It's going to become increasingly common as my generation steps up and runs for office more frequently," she said. "I suspect that more people will get used to that and they already are. But because we're still in the early phases of that, it was important for me to get out in front of this."

There is some truth there. I do not get this shedding of privacy that younger generations (including, sorta, mine) have embraced. The internet is worldwide and it is forever and yet people are so eager to have naughty pictures taken of themselves with cellphones, a piece of technology expressly designed to transmit information to the entire world.

Krystal Ball For Congress

Paid for by the Committee of Dudes With Horny Dick-Noses.

Posted by: Ace at 10:22 AM | Comments (172)
Post contains 280 words, total size 2 kb.

Recently the NY Times had one of their semi-regular “Conservative Gorillas In The Mist” pieces. This time they discovered, much to the horror, that conservatives still read books by people like Hayek. I guess it’s a step in the right direction that liberals acknowledge that conservatives can actually read. Still, they seem pretty mystified that we take these ideas seriously. Naturally, that leads to an attempt at discrediting those ideas (usually in the form of mocking).

Enter this post by liberal wunderkind Ezra Klein.

There isn't any serious player in American politics who supports a centrally planned economy. There are people who support social insurance, and people who support national defense, but no one wants Apple or General Mills to take production orders from a bureaucrat. But it's very hard for political movements to adjust to a world in which they only have to be 10 percent as worried. In some ways, there seems to be an opposite incentive, as lower stakes require groups to use more extreme rhetoric if they're to keep their followers engaged. If Obama had really pushed for a socialized health-care system, the right could've argued against that. As it was, his plan was quite moderate, and so death panels entered the discussion.

At this point, the liberals I know are excited by the prospect of a few things. Extending health insurance -- probably private -- to all Americans. Reducing health-care costs for all Americans, as that will leave them with more of their income to spend on what they wish. Doing something about carbon emissions, preferably through market signals like a carbon tax or cap-and-trade. And, in my case, some sort of early-childhood education system. Marx would be very disappointed, but Hayek, I think, would be quite comforted.

Klein is playing a cutesy little game here (though I doubt itÂ’s one heÂ’s aware of). His thesis is just because the American liberals aren't centralizing power in the same exact ways that their ancestors in HayekÂ’s time did, people on the right are paranoid kooks for paying attention to him. Yes, the Road to Serfdom and a lot of other favorites in the conservative canon speak of centralized power more akin to the old Soviet of command and control systems, but just because the style of government control has changed over time doesnÂ’t mean the results arenÂ’t the same.

First, I'm not sure why Klein to argue that no one wants companies taking “production orders from a bureaucrat” when the US government has more than a passing interest in how General Motors, Chrysler, AIG and a number of large financial institutions are run.

You can certainly say that we arenÂ’t at the point where the federal government is issuing 5 year production plans exactly like the Soviet Union but that doesnÂ’t mean itÂ’s a disinterested spectator when it comes to the choices companies are allowed to make over wide swaths of the American economy.

Even if the federal government didnÂ’t own substantial stakes in 2 of 3 American car manufacturers it is still deeply involved in the types of cares that can be made and the choices Americans will have when they buy a car.

Liberals like Klein love to pretend that if they toss the word ‘market’ onto their Cap and Trade dreams it makes everything alright. Creating a ‘market’ where none is required still leads to greater government control over economic activity. Look at this way…there are way too many pundits today, they are polluting public discourse. In order to cut down on all the clutter we are going to create a new ‘market’ where some pundits will be able to keep publishing while others are silenced. In order to do this the government will sell ‘pundit credits’ and those that can afford them and find a seller can continue to publish, the rest will be out of luck. Would that new ‘pundit market’ mean greater or lesser freedom for pundits and readers? In Klein’s telling of it, that wouldn’t be government increasing its role in the private sector in a harmful way since the pundits wouldn’t be on the government payroll and the government won’t be dictating word for word what’s written like they were in the old Soviet Union. more...

Posted by: DrewM at 10:16 AM | Comments (59)
Post contains 826 words, total size 5 kb.

He's in a D+7 district, tough but not undoable, and his opponent's wife was just convicted of federal tax falsification charges in connection with her brother, a federal fugitive:

The wife of US Representative John F. Tierney pleaded guilty today in US District Court in Boston to four counts of aiding and abetting the filing of false tax returns for her brother, who is a federal fugitive indicted on illegal gambling charges. . . .

I am 95% sure I met this guy at Scott Brown's election night. He introduced himself and told me he could win. I think he can, with a little cash-money help.

And another guy who can win: Bobby Schilling, candidate for IL-17. More on that district after you meet him.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 09:58 AM | Comments (76)
Post contains 249 words, total size 3 kb.

That's an old SNL joke, probably by Will Ferrell, who keeps using that "let me put my ___ in you joke" (which he got, certainly, from AC/DC's "Let Me Put My Love In You").

But I'm tapped out.

Anyway, "This marks the widest gap between the two candidates since late June."

Geraghty notes that the poll question did not include Nevada's infamous "None of the Above" option, but then, the average selection rate for that is 4.8%. And Reid can't expect that signficantly more people inclined, gun to their heads, to vote for Sharon Angle will choose "None of the Above" than people inclined, gun to their heads, to vote for Harry Reid will so toss their vote away.

In other words, there is no sound reason to expect that option to favor either candidate. Maybe it will, but I haven't heard a case as to why Reid benefits from it. The argument would have to be something like, of all the people totally unstoked by either candidate, the people unstoked by Harry Reid are slightly less unstoked than the people unstoked by Sharon Angle.

I don't really think you can poll that.

Oh, and Marco Rubio? He's doin' just fine.

Republican Marco Rubio "is in the catbird's seat" in the race for Florida's U.S. Senate seat, with Gov. Charlie Crist stalled in second and Democrat Kendrick Meek lagging even further behind in third, according to a Mason-Dixon poll released Thursday.

Rubio has pushed his lead to 15 percentage points, attracting 42 percent of voters, compared to 27 percent for Crist, who's running as an independent, and 21 percent for Meek, the poll showed. Ten percent of voters remain undecided.

If Rubio can stay above 40 percent, it will be difficult for Crist or Meek to catch him, said Mason-Dixon pollster Brad Coker.

"Most Crist voters don't seem likely to jump to Meek, and most Meek voters don't appear ready to throw in with Crist," Coker said. "The stand-off on the left and center makes it easy for Rubio to win simply by consolidating the base of conservative-leaning Florida voters."

Oooh: Republican poll puts Rossi ahead of Murray by 6 points.

The survey, conducted by Fabrizio, McLaughlin and Associates for the conservative-aligned American Action Forum, showed Rossi leading Murray 48 percent to 42 percent among likely voters. The results indicate that the race has shifted in Rossi's favor since June, when the same pollster's survey showed the candidates tied at 46 percent apiece.

And... In a week-old poll which we probably covered, Grayson seven points behind Webster.

Submit to me.

Posted by: Ace at 08:48 AM | Comments (119)
Post contains 462 words, total size 3 kb.

Well, they passed the bill and now they are finding out whatÂ’s in itÂ…the death of the American health care system.

As Obama administration officials put into place the first major wave of changes under the health care legislation, they have tried to defuse stiffening resistance — from companies like McDonald’s and some insurers — by granting dozens of waivers to maintain even minimal coverage far below the new law’s standards.

…To date, the administration has given about 30 insurers, employers and union plans, responsible for covering about one million people, one-year waivers on the new rules that phase out annual limits on coverage for limited-benefit plans, also known as “mini-meds.” Applicants said their premiums would increase significantly, in some cases doubling or more.

These early exemptions offer the first signs of how the administration may tackle an even more difficult hurdle: the resistance from insurers and others against proposed regulations that will determine how much insurers spend on consumersÂ’ health care versus administrative overhead, a major cornerstone of the law.

Several leading insurers, including WellPoint, Aetna and Cigna, have also objected to new rules requiring them to cover even those children who are seriously ill, warning that they will stop selling new policies in some states because the rules do not protect them from having to cover too many sick children.

“The hardest part of health reform is always going to be the transition,” said Peter T. Harbage, a former state health official who is a policy consultant in Sacramento. He predicts more insurers and employers will lean on the government to delay or weaken the new regulations. “I think this pressure just increases until we get to 2014,” he said, referring to the year that the law will fully go into effect.

Yes, things are bad now because of the law but as soon as we have even more government intervention in the market place, why then things will just be awesome.

I love how the reporter calls a logical economic response to government action “stiffening resistance”. These companies aren’t resisting anything; they are simply making choices based on a new reality. Don’t get all snippy with them just because they refuse to go bankrupt in order to pretend that all the Democratic promises which were disconnected from any known reality were true.

ItÂ’s not bad enough that the government is mucking around in peopleÂ’s health care decisions; now big government is going to be in the business of handing out special dispensations for the chosen few. If you like your coverage, you can keep itÂ…if we deign to give you a waiver. I wonder what groups will be looked upon favorably by this gangster administration and which will be told to go to hell. IÂ’m sure itÂ’ll all be very fair and equitable.

This was always the scary shadow in the background of the health care debate. This law and itÂ’s tangle of bureaucratic regulations would screw things up so badly and make things worse that the next step would be even greater involvement by government to clean up the mess the previous round of laws made. Eventually, the out of control costs, the shrinking number of players in the private insurance market and the increase in people without coverage would lead to calls for nationalized health care.

Posted by: DrewM at 08:30 AM | Comments (134)
Post contains 563 words, total size 4 kb.

Lots of great comments on the unemployment claims thread, most explaining why I'm a Pollyanna in my upbeat take on the data. But one item keeps popping up: the Gallup poll that shows a 10.1% unemployment rate. Let me caution you in reading too much into that, because...

It's not seasonally adjusted.

Look at the first line:

"Unemployment, as measured by Gallup without seasonal adjustment, increased to 10.1% in September..."

You can see from the data from the previous winter that unemployment last year went over 10%, then dropped during the milder months. Since the data doesn't go back to Sept. '09, you can't tell if we're better or worse off than last year. Without a seasonal adjustment or a reference from last year, the data is pretty much useless.

Posted by: Geoff at 08:11 AM | Comments (58)
Post contains 136 words, total size 1 kb.

...or am I really seeing a positive trend in unemployment numbers for the first time in almost a year?

The Department of Labor released the weekly initial unemployment claims data this morning: claims dropped a bit, from 456,000 last week (adjusted up from 453,000) down to 445,000. Here's what that looks like on a chart that runs back to the pre-Pelosi era, when unemployment claims ran about 325K/week. Thanks, Nancy!!

Back in the first 3/4 of 2009, the number of filings was dropping at about 500 to 600 per day. After mid-November 2009, however, the filings stopped dropping so quickly. In fact, they barely dropped at all.

But, if we take a closer look at the data, here's what we see:

People have been talking about "green shoots" for over a year, but that talk has been meaningless in the face of the huge numbers of bankruptcies, foreclosures, and unemployed, none of which have improved much, if at all. This is the first promising employment trend I've seen in the past year, and I think it's real.

Why now? Businesses have been holding their breath for 2 years, wondering what the business environment is going to look like under the Obama/Reid/Pelosi triumvirate. The November elections will probably result in gridlock at worst and a favorable business environment at best. So businesses are finally exhaling, preparatory to a big, honking, gasp of air.

I'm starting to believe that Santa will be bringing us the Tickle-Me Recovery Doll that we've always wanted.

Posted by: Geoff at 06:49 AM | Comments (162)
Post contains 323 words, total size 2 kb.

Thursday is like, pre-Friday.

Couple of Senate poll things, in Missouri, Roy Blunt up 13 over Robin Carnahan in a CNN/Time poll released yesterday evening. Same poll has Angle +2 over Reid in Nevada (Rasmussen says +4). Even better, the incumbent majority leader Reid hasn't seen 50 since early Sept.

And in bloody Ohio, Quinnipiac has Rob Portman struggling to hold on to his 19 point lead over Lee Fisher.

Courage.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 05:43 AM | Comments (156)
Post contains 79 words, total size 1 kb.

Aside from me being pretty happy to see my Rangers back in the playoffs (5-1 over the Rays this afternoon), it's also cool that Phillies pitcher Roy Halladay made a little history today with a no-hitter over the Reds.

The only other time it happened in post-season play was 1956, Don Larsen for the Yankees against the Brooklyn Dodgers, which not only was a no-hitter, it was the crown jewel for a pitcher, a "perfect game" (27 up, 27 down, no one reached base).

This Yahoo pic put em side by side, Yogi Berra and Larson, and Phillies catcher Carlos Ruiz and Halladay.

Hey, normally I'm off baseball by August, except for the couple of times I watched the Rangers eat the schnitz against the Yankees (who just downed the Twins 6-4) in less than 5 games.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 08:16 PM | Comments (60)
Post contains 145 words, total size 1 kb.

Look, I can hear Winston Wolf's voice in my head but this is getting to be too much fun.

Remember when liberals raised over a million dollars for the guy running against Joe "You Lie" Wilson in the wake of that blowup?

Yeah turns out that might not have been the best use for the money.

According to a report by The Associated Press, Miller -- who is hoping to oust Rep. Joe Wilson (R) in the South Carolina 2nd district race -- said Wednesday that he would not vote to keep Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) as Speaker in the 112th Congress.

The AP reported that Miller's comments were in response to a Wilson ad showing side-by-side images of Miller and Pelosi, who has contributed money to the Democrat's campaign.

Now Miller evidently is looking to distance himself from Pelosi, and he told the AP that Washington is broken and blamed leaders for the strife, according to the wire service.

Now Markos is chiming in.

How many of you gave money to this dumbass, b/c his opponent screamed "you lie" at Obama?

If you Google "Daily Kos, Rob Miller, Joe Wilson" you'll see there were more than a few posts soliciting support for Miller. Now, he's taken their cash and turned on their heroes.

Someone once said "Break their back, crush their spirits". I hope he has better insurance than ObamaCare provides because he's about to get his back broken, his ass kicked and his lunch money taken away.

Posted by: DrewM at 07:13 PM | Comments (83)
Post contains 277 words, total size 2 kb.