Sarah Palin is such an idiot. How could she mess up something as simple as the name of the top Republican in the Senate?

Wait, it wasn't Palin. No it was Bill Clinton's understudy, Barack Husein Obama who did that.

(Obama) referred in absentia to the GOP Senate leader as “Mike McConnell” – suggesting the need for few more Slurpee summits perhaps. He did laud McConnell as one of the lawmakers in both parties who embraced the cause.

Now this isn't remotely a big deal. In fact, it's not even a little deal. It's no deal
at all except for the fact the media went crazy when Palin said, "our North Korean allies" despite having made it clear several times in the same interview she knew the difference between North and South Korea. fficial&client=firefox-a#hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=d9Y&pwst=1&rls=org.mozilla:en-US fficial&&sa=X&ei=YW4GTbb3JYK0lQfRpoXhCw&ved=0CBsQvwUoAQ&q=palin+north+korean+allies&spell=1&fp=9111c1d610a8252">Here's the Google page for hits on the subject. It wasn't just lefty blogs but MFM outlets as well. Actually, I guess most MFM outlets are essentially lefty blogs when you get right down to it.

Posted by: DrewM at 10:22 AM | Comments (39)
Post contains 187 words, total size 2 kb.

FNC reporting district court rules individual mandate unconstitutional.

Stand by for more.

Still looking for a story summarizing everything. Right now twitter is a good source for people, including Gabe, who are going through it.

Bottom line seems to be this.

Judge Hudson (pg 24): mandate "exceeds the Commerce Clause powers vested in Congress under Article I"

Gabe emails with a link to the decision (pdf) and this note:

The judge held that the act is severable, so only the indv. mandate and those provisions "directly dependent" on the indv. mandate that refer back to it specifically will be struck down

On Severability: [ace]: I have to correct a mistake I made here-- I said that without a severability clause, the act would fall if any section of it was found unconstitutional.

Turns out that's not right; courts will still try to keep as much of law with an unconstitutional section as possible. I guess the whole act would fall only if the bill was found to be so dependent on this section as to render it senseless without it.

At the Volokh Conspiracy, Randy Barnett was recently thinking about the issue. He thought the whole act would fall. I guess this judge sees it different.

(Gabe, by the way, correctly forecast the outcome here by stating (in an email discussion about this) that only the mandate itself and those bits of ObamaCare directly reliant on the mandate would fall.)

Posted by: DrewM at 09:07 AM | Comments (335)
Post contains 260 words, total size 2 kb.

At Hot Air, Ed disputes the premise, calling it a "big if."

I doubt the conclusion, even if I accept the premise. What the hell is the point of Breyer's statement? If I sign a contract with a man to buy his house, the contract specifies I'll get his house, contingent on my making a cash payment.

Now, obviously, I've only agreed to the cash payment as an inducement for him to sell. Certainly I'd rather just keep my money -- and get the house for free. But I've agreed to give something to get something.

I mean, duh.

Even if Breyer's premise is true, what the hell could that possibly matter in the sense he means it, that is, whether or not the Second Amendment is an enforceable amendment? If the right to bear arms was so critical to the Constitution's passage that the drafters found it necessary to include it -- then that is an essential term of the bargain between the federal and state governments, and cannot be ignored anymore than I can ignore my agreement to pay cash for a house just because "I didn't really want to."

Further, the entire Bill of Rights was written for the purposes of reassuring reluctant citizens (and states, which actually ratified the Constitution) of the limits of federal power. Breyer's notion that an amendment can just be ignored if it was only agreed to in order to reassure citizens and states would void all ten of the Bill of Rights Amendments. The federal government only guaranteed the right to free speech and peaceful assembly because the states (and their respective citizens) feared it might abridge that right. Does that one "not count" too?

And if the Second Amendment doesn't count -- why, then, let us chuck this other appeasement to the states, this notion that the state shall not establish an official religion. After all, they only threw that in there to get people to sign on the line which is dotted.

What is Breyer's "constitutional analysis" except a childish claim of "I had my fingers crossed when I said that"?

Posted by: Ace at 08:34 AM | Comments (156)
Post contains 400 words, total size 2 kb.

Obama is expected to sign this piece of shit legislation.

...The $4.5 billion measure would expand free school meals for the needy and give the government the power to decide what kinds of foods may be sold in vending machines, lunch lines and fundraisers during school hours....

OTOH, any budding young capitalists will quickly realize they can make a run to Dollar Tree and stock up on "unhealthy" Little Debbies and other shit like that, then make a killing bootlegging them to their classmates who've grown weary of the new Federal government dictated vending machine "snacks".

Of course, TSA will soon be consulting with school districts on methods for frisking students so all that contraband Dollar Tree stuff can be confiscated before it touches any eager lips.

Didn't we try this sort of thing already with prohibition? Yea, we did.

Didn't it create a whole new underground economy leading to vastly increased power for crime syndicates? Yea, it did.

Jill: pssst, Johnny, can you hook me up? I'm Jonsing for some twinkies?

Johnny: no can do babe, not today, I got Ding Dongs in stock this week.

Jill: OK, I'll take'em today, but you'll have the Twinkies next week, right?

Posted by: Purple Avenger at 06:22 AM | Comments (336)
Post contains 258 words, total size 2 kb.

10 dead in Britain so far this winter.

...Health Protection Agency (HPA) confirmed that ten people have died after becoming infected over the last six weeks. The HPA confirms that the H1N1 virus is circulating again this winter....

Posted by: Purple Avenger at 05:32 AM | Comments (119)
Post contains 67 words, total size 1 kb.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 03:09 AM | Comments (115)
Post contains 8 words, total size 1 kb.

It's kinda early but why not?

The Year in Animated Sex Scandals

Courtesy of the animators at Taiwan's Next Media Animation.

How could we forget Ambien sex, second chakras, and cellphone junk pics.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 04:30 PM | Comments (1088)
Post contains 764 words, total size 9 kb.

Via commenter curious, the pretty darn amazing video of the Metro(sexual)dome collapse...from inside the stadium:

Consider this an afternoon open thread.

Update: Well, crap. Didn't see that Dave and Drew already got that video. Ah, heck, been a while since we had a double post anyway.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 10:46 AM | Comments (380)
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.

Last week was an extraordinary week in politics. Fairly ordinary business led to high-school levels of angst and drama, including the Democratic civil war, a presidential abdication, and an honest-to-Buddha filibuster. One of my coworkers sagely observed to me as I was racing out of the building on Friday to watch President Clinton take over for former President Obama: "You're in heaven right now, aren't you?" Yes, yes I was.

Next week's scheduled activities will likely promote more of the same. Here's what's on the drama-inducing schedule:

On Monday, RNC Chair Michael Steele is expected to announce that he will not seek to keep his job. Challengers have already lined up around the block. Given his poor performance and the RNC's money woes, there isn't much point to him trying for reelection anyway. I supported him when he sought the position, but there is no denying that his failures have been substantial and there is no reason to expect him to do better in the future. The RNC can most definitely do better.

Also on Monday, the Senate will hold a test vote on the tax cut deal. Unusually, the legislation is going to be easier to pass in the Senate than the House (the reverse is typically true for contentious legislation). However, just this morning, Democratic House members were conceding that Soon-To-Be-Ex-Speaker Pelosi will allow a vote on the bill and that it will pass.

I was in favor of the deal when it was announced for reasons partially explained here and here. (In short, it's more win for us than loss and the President was made to look like a fool.) I'm less happy now that it has been larded up with ethanol subsidies, but don't think we're going to see a better deal. Make no mistake: the clock is ticking and this needs to get done sooner rather than later. Waiting until after the new Congress is seated will be an economy killer.

Also on the schedule this week, the Senate will vote on the new START treaty, which for reasons not clear to anyone has been an Obama priority. The treaty doesn't hold nearly the urgency of other pressing business, like the imminent tax hikes and a federal budget. Speaking of...

The Senate will also have to consider federal funding before the end of the week because the current continuing resolution expires on Friday. The House passed a $1.1 trillion CR last week, which would fund the government at last year's levels through September. The purpose of such an extended CR is to keep the budget out of GOP hands until the next fiscal year, even if it means less money than Sometimes-President Obama requested. A friend in government told me that management in his agency has warned employees to "be prepared for the F-word".*

Also on the Senate menu is Senators Collins' and Liebermans' stand-alone Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal bill. Most observers, including me, say it's chances are slim. To pass the Senate, it would have to take place after the tax deal and the budget/CR votes, then find time on the House's schedule.

In international news, everybody tighten those sphincters. South Korea has announced a series of coastal live-fire drills to take place from December 13 through December 19. I include it in this political list because if something goes wrong, you're damn right it's going to get political real fast.

That's all I got. If there's something else doin', you be sure and let me know in comments.

* "Furloughs."

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 09:54 AM | Comments (111)
Post contains 596 words, total size 4 kb.

Whoa. Heavy snow in the midwest, lotsa rain on the east coast (that'll probably become snow later).

Stay cozy morons. Watch a game. Shoveling snow is for suckers.

WHOA: I been out, hadn't heard about the Metrodome collapse. DrewM sent me this:

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 08:45 AM | Comments (510)
Post contains 48 words, total size 1 kb.