WashTimes' Misleading Headline: "Values Groups Out at CPAC"
— Gabriel Malor

This is apparently going to be a fixture in second-tier media and online media until CPAC in February, but -- as I noted here -- the family feud does not pit CPAC against social conservatives.

The Washington Times today has an article headlined: "Gay group in, values groups out at CPAC: Social conservatives to skip gathering."

That is simply not the case. Many social conservative groups are still attending as "participating organizations" (the same status as GOProud). They include pro-life groups, Christian ministries groups, and family values groups. Of course, these will be participating in CPAC with many participating organizations that aren't socially conservative, including tax reform advocates, limited government groups, economic conservatives, an English-advocacy group and a group seeking to legalize online gambling.

The only folks who benefit from portraying the boycott as a generalized abandonment of CPAC by social conservatives are Democrats (who love a good conservative crack-up) and the few groups who have chosen to absent themselves. They are putatively led by Family Research Council, but as I have repeatedly noted, FRC wasn't going to participate this year (or last) anyway and so aren't really boycotting as a result of GOProud inclusion. FRC now operates a rival conference, the Values Voters Summit and therefore simply benefits by drawing attendance away from CPAC.

The Washington Times adds Heritage to the list of "values groups" boycotting, but that isn't related to GOProud either. When Heritage announced its decision last month, it didn't link its attendance to GOProud. Instead, Heritage said that it's a budget issue:

"With the rise of the Tea Party groups this year, there have been more and more meetings we've been going to, and we're trying to reach out to new conservatives," said James Weidman, a Heritage spokesman. "We have a limited budget for outreach and we've got more and more organizations out there that want our outreach."

"We've been a fixture at CPAC for years. I'm not sure we're going to reach any new people there," Weidman added.

The boycotting groups, which include the Center for Military Readiness, the American Family Association, the American Principles Project, the Liberty Counsel and the National Organization for Marriage, continually suggest that CPAC is trying to push them out of the movement.

Andy Blom, executive director of the American Principles Project, called the move to marginalize values voters self-defeating.

"The rather arrogant treatment of social conservatives by libertarians is troubling," said Mr. Blom. "Social conservatives are the foot soldiers of the movement. Marriage has never lost an election. Being pro-life does not lose elections. It wins elections. This is not only a serious principle mistake, it's a serious political mistake."

Blom doesn't seem to acknowledge the existence of economic conservatives, or admit that both social conservatives and economic conservatives are necessary for conservative candidates to continue to win elections. And once again he claims that CPAC is "marginalizing" social conservatives when, in fact, CPAC continues to welcome both social conservatives and economic conservatives. It was these groups' decision to marginalize themselves simply because they refuse to be put on the same list with a gay group.

Another socially conservative group that isn't part of the boycott seems to recognize that self-marginalization will only reduce social conservative influence:

Groups such as Citizen Link, the political-action arm of Focus on the Family, plan to attend this year's CPAC, but say the conference is on a short leash.

"It's obvious the influence of social conservatives has been missing and there needs to be more of it," said Tom Minnery, senior vice president of Citizen Link. "If the ACU can't manage this problem that they've brought upon themselves, we'll have to make another decision."

The point is that CPAC is the paramount annual gathering of conservatives; if these groups want their influence to be felt, they have to show up. CPAC continues to welcome them and, of course, thousands of social conservatives will still show up for the conference despite the boycott.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 08:05 AM | Comments (127)
Post contains 675 words, total size 5 kb.

Ancient Document Written In Foreign Language By Some Dead White Guys Being Read In House Of Representatives
— DrewM

If you're watching the reading of the Constitution in the House, you may want to follow along so you can see what these strange, undecipherable words look like.

Is this a stunt? Yes, of course. That's the beauty of it. Stunts attract attention. This is attracting attention not just to the Constitution itself but the very different philosophies some in each party have when it comes to interpreting the Constitution and its role in our government.

I say "some" because let's be honest, lots of Republicans gave plenty of lip service to the Constitution but honored it more in the breach than anything. And let's also be honest, if Republicans/conservatives are serious about getting back to constitutional first principles, it's going to be a long term process of educating and persuading a lot of people. Remember how Joe Miller got tripped up on the idea that unemployment insurance was unconstitutional? Forget the merits of the statement, that's simply a bridge too far right now for most Americans.

Now for your moment of RINO Zen....while I support a much more limited understanding of the Constitution than is currently fashionable, I think too many conservatives fall back on "just do what the Constitution says". The Constitution is not a mathematical formula you just plug variables into and get the answer. Applying it to specific problems requires some degree of interpretation. Consider something so basic as the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

No one seriously argues that "freedom of speech" means you can libel or slander someone. So we all accept that there are limits, even when the document itself doesn't speak to them, we are just arguing over what they are, where they are and how they are to be reached.

By the same token, just because any constitution is going to require some degree of interpretation in its application, that doesn't mean judges and the political branches can read whatever they want into the Constitution and have no limitations on their actions either. And despite what liberals say or think, the Constitution doesn't need judges to breathe life into it. If what you want to do isn't allowed by the Constitution as is, there's a legitimate amendment process and it doesn't involve judges.

Our challenge as conservatives and constitutionalists is to layout a coherent view of how the Constitution should be understood and applied. Since the ultimate arbiters of what is constitutionally legitimate or not is the people as a whole, this is as much a political argument as a legal one.

November's elections and today's reading of the Constitution and the debate it's sparking is a step in the right direction for those of us who prefer a more modest, text based interpretation. You can tell that's the case by the reaction of liberals to today's event. You'd think they were vampires and Republicans just pulled out a cross or something. Perhaps if we keep holding the Constitution up to them, they'll burst into flames. It's worth a shot.

Posted by: DrewM at 06:54 AM | Comments (408)
Post contains 575 words, total size 4 kb.

Those in Glass Hangars Shouldn't Throw Stones
— Geoff

Experts are pooh-poohing the stealth Chinese fighter:

Experts, however, are warning against drawing conclusions on the basis of the photographs.

Douglas Barrie, an aerospace expert at the International Institute of Strategic Studies, noted that the J20's airframe resembled that of an abandoned Russian prototype, the MiG 1.42.

"I'm not sure that its even much of an impressive airframe," said Richard Aboulafia, another analyst. "It looks like something that might have been designed in 1985."

That would be a lot more comforting if it wasn't true of the F-22, as well. The Demonstration/Validation part of the F-22 development program was started in 1986. Not only the design is old, of course - look at the average age of fighters themselves (from Air Force Magazine):

Before we start mocking the Chinese we'd better get some F-35s in inventory, or at least restore the F-22 buy that SecDef Gates canceled.

Posted by: Geoff at 05:36 AM | Comments (158)
Post contains 160 words, total size 1 kb.

Initial Unemployment Claims Data Continue to Fall
— Geoff

The Department of Labor released this week's Initial Unemployment Claims report, with only 409,000 claims filed last week. That's the 2nd lowest number of claims filed in over 2 years (though it'll likely drop to 3rd when they revise the number next week). The lowest number of claims (391K) was filed last the previous week. As you can see from this chart, these numbers are in line with the steady decline in claims that we've been reporting since last September.

And as we've noted for the past several months, there's a strong case to be made that the Claims data behavior has been strongly influenced key political events. I.e., responsibility for the stagnation from November 2009 through July 2010 can be laid at the incapable feet of the former Speaker of the House.

Posted by: Geoff at 04:47 AM | Comments (49)
Post contains 147 words, total size 1 kb.

Top Headline Comments 1-6-11
— Gabriel Malor

Whatever it is you're doing, pretty soon someone is going to tell you to stop it.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 03:34 AM | Comments (75)
Post contains 24 words, total size 1 kb.

So Long Nancy, and Thanks!
— Dave in Texas

Too good not to share.

If you never saw a bunch of morons pick themselves up after taking a punch, this was one of the most refreshing moments I remember from this place. The New Age of Freedom from Want.

Well the shoe is on the other hand now, ain't it?

via LauraW

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 07:15 PM | Comments (70)
Post contains 63 words, total size 1 kb.

Overnight Open Thread
— Maetenloch

Welcome to yet another semi-half-assed hump day ONT.

Adorable Video of the Day

Here father-daughter duo Jorge and Alexa Narvaez do an uber-cute version of Edward Sharpe & The Magnetic ZerosÂ’ "Home."

Good And Bad News For Obama

The good news is that his approval ratings have risen back over 50%. The bad news is that midterm approval ratings are pretty much useless in predicting which presidents get re-elected.

more...

Posted by: Maetenloch at 05:50 PM | Comments (552)
Post contains 741 words, total size 8 kb.

Breaking: Chris Christie Makes Surprise Announcement That He's Definitely Running For Governor
— Ace

Yeah, for governor. Even with the Zogby poll showing him beating Obama, he reiterated his oft-stated vow to not run for President. Then that's good news for the President, he said, when told he was the only Republican beating him in the poll.

I used to believe him, then figured hell, maybe he'd change his mind. But with these repetitions of his vow, I'm starting to believe him again.

Posted by: Ace at 02:47 PM | Comments (287)
Post contains 93 words, total size 1 kb.

Boehner's Kinda Awesome Speech
— Ace

All the right notes, and I think he means them. What he's stressing is not the details of governance but the central assumption of it -- democracy, where the people rule.

I actually was taken with this as he spoke, and (I've mentioned this before) I tend to hate speeches, finding them pretty meaningless, even as broad announcements of vague goals. Discussing speeches tends to just be rating oratory and stagecraft and guessing what will happen in the polls, not anything important beyond those horserace/public relations considerations. Reviewing speeches, for me, is as important in the scheme of things, even in politics, as reviewing an especially dreary TV show.

But a vigorous, repeated call for the people's representatives to remember who serves who? That's actually pretty important, especially after the summer of 2009, when Democrats gave the entire country a proud middle finger of elitist, entitled disdain.

Here's the video, and some of the best bits in transcripted form:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The people of OhioÂ’s Eighth Congressional District continue to afford me the privilege to serve, for which I am deeply grateful.

We gather here today at a time of great challenges. Nearly one in ten of our neighbors are looking for work. Health care costs are still rising for families and small businesses. Our spending has caught up with us, and our debt will soon eclipse the size of our entire economy. Hard work and tough decisions will be required of the 112th Congress.

No longer can we fall short. No longer can we kick the can down the road. The people voted to end business as usual, and today we begin carrying out their instructions.

In the Catholic faith, we enter into a season of service by having ashes marked on our foreheads. The ashes remind us that life in all its forms is fragile – our time on this Earth, fleeting. As the ashes are delivered, we hear those humbling words: “Remember you are dust, and to dust you shall return.”

The American people have humbled us. They have refreshed our memories as to just how temporary the privilege to serve is. They have reminded us that everything here is on loan from them. That includes this gavel, which I accept cheerfully and gratefully, knowing I am but its caretaker. After all, this is the peopleÂ’s House. This is their Congress. ItÂ’s about them, not us. What they want is a government that is honest, accountable and responsive to their needs. A government that respects individual liberty, honors our heritage, and bows before the public it serves.

LetÂ’s start with the rules package the House will consider today. If passed, it will change how this institution operates, with an emphasis on real transparency, greater accountability, and a renewed focus on the Constitution.

Our aim will be to give government back to the people. In seeking this goal, we will part with some of the rituals that have come to characterize this institution under majorities Republican and Democratic alike. We will dispense with the conventional wisdom that bigger bills are always better; that fast legislating is good legislating; that allowing additional amendments and open debate makes the legislative process “less efficient” than our forefathers intended.

These misconceptions have been the basis for the rituals of modern Washington. The American people have not been well served by them.

...

Let us now move forward humble in our demeanor, steady in our principles, and dedicated to proving worthy of the trust and confidence that has been placed in us. If we brace ourselves to do our duty, and to do what we say we are going to do, there is no telling what together we can accomplish for the good of this great and honorable nation. More than a country, America is an idea, and it is our job to pass on to our posterity the blessings bestowed to us.

A particularly important quote is over at Hot Air, and a link to hyperliberal toddler Ezra Klein admitting, well, you'll see what he admits.

Klein seems to chalk it up to cunning and stagecraft, but I think it was more than that; maybe I'm a sap, but I think Boehner meant it.

Posted by: Ace at 02:27 PM | Comments (120)
Post contains 720 words, total size 6 kb.

PETA: Hey, I've Got a Great New Way To Publicize Our Cause... Maybe I'm Crazy, But Have You Ever Considered Public Nudity?
— Ace

This is pretty much PETA's go-to attention-whore. That, and Holocaust equivalencies.

At this point I'm pretty much eating more meat than necessary just because I don't want to have to pay for porn, and I know PETA will oblige me. They have taught me that I have to buy a mink boa in order to nut.

Since you're going to click on those pictures, let me spare you some time, and note that this is the only one where you can see (sorta) see anything.

A blurry orange side-boob cheetah-paint nipple, but that's enough for me.

Thanks, PETA!

Posted by: Ace at 01:06 PM | Comments (138)
Post contains 142 words, total size 1 kb.