Read it all.

As the bad economic news continues to emanate from the United States — with a double-dip recession now all but certain — a reckoning is overdue. American journalism will have to look back at the period starting with Barrack Obama’s rise, his assumption of the presidency and his conduct in it to the present, and ask itself how it came to cast aside so many of its vital functions. In the main, the establishment American media abandoned its critical faculties during the Obama campaign — and it hasn’t reclaimed them since.

Much of the Obama coverage was orchestrated sychophancy. They glided past his pretensions — when did a presidential candidate before “address the world” from the Brandenberg Gate in Berlin? They ignored his arrogance — “You’re likeable enough, Hillary.” And they averted their eyes from his every gaffe — such as the admission that he didn’t speak “Austrian.”

The media walked right past the decades-long association of Obama with the weird and racist pastor Jermiah Wright. In the midst of the brief stormlet over the issue, one CNN host — inexplicably — decided that CNN was going to be a “Wright-free zone.” He could have hung out a sign: “No bad news about Obama here.”

Tie Obama to the media and tie the media to Obama and let them drown together.

This is I think a vital topic. It deserves some serious push.

The American People would like some answers. Not just from the adoration-addict in the White House, but from his chief enablers.

Thanks to "chillin the most for perry."

Posted by: Ace at 10:43 AM | Comments (142)
Post contains 304 words, total size 2 kb.

Oh, just kidding. It's gotten even worse. But you can only post so many "Solyndra just got worse" headlines before you get bored.

Major Obama fundraiser linked to Solyndra loans. I mean another major Obama fundraiser.

Steve Spinner, who helped monitor the Energy Department's issuance of $25 billion in government loan guarantees to renewable energy projects, was one of Obama's top fundraisers in 2008 and is raising money for the president's 2012 reelection campaign.

Spinner did not have any role in the selection of applicants for the loan program and, in fact, was recused from the decision to grant a $535-million loan guarantee to Solyndra Inc. because his wife's law firm represented the company, administration officials said Friday.

But Spinner's role as a top official in the Energy Department program, which had not been previously revealed, is likely to spur new inquiries into whether political influence played a role in the handling of the "green" energy fund. Solyndra faces a congressional probe, a criminal investigation and separate internal inquiries at the Energy and Treasury departments.

He recused himself from formally making the decision, they say, but he may not have recused himself from influencing the decision.

How cozy an arrangement this is for all involved.

Thanks to JohnE.

Posted by: Ace at 10:34 AM | Comments (38)
Post contains 230 words, total size 2 kb.

To be replaced on the ballot, of course, by Hillary!

I checked the Constitution, and he is under no compulsion to run for re-election. He can scrap the campaign, bag the fundraising calls and never watch another Republican debate as long as heÂ’s willing to vacate the premises by Jan. 20, 2013.

That might be the sensible thing to do. It’s hard for a president to win a second term when unemployment is painfully high. If the economy were in full rebound mode, Obama might win anyway. But it isn’t, and it may fall into a second recession — in which case voters will decide his middle name is Hoover, not Hussein. Why not leave of his own volition instead of waiting to get the ax?

Posted by: Ace at 10:08 AM | Comments (140)
Post contains 148 words, total size 1 kb.

If you're any kind of sci-fan, you've probably read Neal Stephenson's epochal cyberpunk novel Snow Crash. Many consider it his best book to date (though I favor Cryptonomicon). However, his later efforts have fallen somewhat short in my opinion -- long, somewhat turgid slogs like the three-book Baroque Cycle or the near-unreadable Anathem. He is a wonderful novelist, but he tends towards gigantism and Byzantine detail if not checked, and in his past several books his editors have been on holiday. Stephenson's newest book REAMDE (no, that's not a typo) is out, and while I hope it improves over his past several efforts, I note that it weighs in at 1056 pages in the hardcover edition. Sigh. I'll buy it, and I'll read it, but I confess that my enthusiasm for his work gets lower with each successive book.

Frankly, I'm looking forward much more to Vernor Vinge's The Children of the Sky, which is the sequel to my favorite sci-fi novel of all time, A Fire Upon the Deep.

On the techie side of things: many of you know that I have an Amazon Kindle and love it. However, the current models have several drawbacks -- they lack color screens, they are not touch-screen enabled, and the software interface isn't exactly intuitive. Ever since Apple introduced the iPad, people have been wondering if Amazon would release a competitor product that had the same features: a high-resolution color screen, a touch-enabled interface, and the ability to surf the web, watch movies, and listen to music in addition to reading books. Well, it looks like Amazon is very close to releasing their own Android-based tablet computer to compete with the iPad. (Amazon is probably OEM-ing the tablet from the likes of Asus or one of the other large Asian electronics makers.)

What makes Amazon think they can succeed in the tablet space where the likes of HP and RIM have failed? I think the answer is: software infrastructure. The hardware is actually a less important part of the experience than the software infrastructure is, and Amazon has an incredible software stack to go up against Apple. They have a huge music store, a huge bookstore, and a huge streaming-movie database all online and currently available. All they have to do is flip a switch to make this stuff available on a tablet. (The "Kindle" interface is just software, after all -- you can read your books already on your cellphone or PC if you like.) Amazon may even offer a "Prime" membership with a tablet purchase; in addition to making shipping free for most orders from Amazon, you also get access to hundreds of free movies and television shows via the video-streaming service.

Another interesting tidbit: the new tablet won't be running Google's version of Android. Amazon has apparently forked the Android codebase and is using their own internally-developed build on the 7-inch device. They obviously want to exert a great deal of control over the whole software experience, which has both good and bad aspects to it.

So the upshot is that you have a device which physically resembles the RIM PlayBook or B&N's Nook: a 7-inch capacitive color touchscreen, a single-core ARM CPU, and with WiFi-only connectivity at first. Cost? It'll have to undercut Apple's iPad, which means the low-end model will probably come in at $250 or so. Word is that they're going to try and get it released before the holidays, maybe as soon as October. I think Amazon can leverage their existing content and software stack enough to make a branded tablet computer a big hit.

I'll probably pick one of these doodads up when they get released and see if it really imrpoves on the black-and-white Kindle. I'm betting that the battery-life sucks in comparison -- I routinely get 10-14 days out of a charge on my current Kindle, while the new color Kindle will probably be like every other tablet out there: 10-12 hours on a charge, depending on usage.

Posted by: Monty at 05:18 AM | Comments (149)
Post contains 672 words, total size 4 kb.

A knave; a rascal; an eater of broken meats; base, proud, shallow, beggarly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy, worsted-stocking knave; a lily-livered, action-taking knave, a whoreson, glass-gazing, super-serviceable finical rogue; one-trunk-inheriting slave; one that wouldst be a bawd, in way of good service, and art nothing but the composition of a knave, beggar, coward, pandar, and the son and heir of a mongrel bitch: one whom I will beat into clamorous whining, if thou deniest the least syllable of thy addition.

-- William Shakespeare, King Lear

Posted by: Monty at 04:49 AM | Comments (311)
Post contains 92 words, total size 1 kb.

What's up 'rons and 'ettes!! Sorry about last night but I was just worn out from work this week. Thanks Ben for capably filling in!

Well as you can tell from tonight's theme, Oktoberfest started today. Now how many of you know what Oktoberfest is about? That is, besides bier, dirndls, lederhosen, brats and, well, boobehs.

The History Of Oktoberfest.

The Oktoberfest tradition started in 1810 to celebrate the October 12th marriage of Bavarian Crown Prince Ludwig to the Saxon-Hildburghausen Princess Therese. The citizens of Munich were invited to join in the festivities which were held over five days on the fields in front of the city gates. The main event of the original Oktoberfest was a horse race.

Posted by: Open Blogger at 05:35 PM | Comments (802)
Post contains 742 words, total size 8 kb.

It is now unlikely that the electoral vote proposal in Pennsylvania will pass, and there are reasons against going for it, rather thoroughly explained by Nate Silver of the New York Times.

However, set aside the drawbacks and the dimming likelihood for a moment. Republicans control the statehouses and gov mansions in Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin as well. Three of these four have proven themselves election teases, yet in several elections the Republican Presidential candidate won a majority of the congressional districts (Michigan in 2000 and 2004 being the ugliest example of this, with George W Bush clearly winning 10 districts and still losing the state).

Democrats love to push the national popular vote, saying its more just. Well, what is the Republican counter-argument about "justness" and seeking accurate representation of the voters, on a state level? (Warning- large map below) more...

Posted by: CAC at 03:27 PM | Comments (200)
Post contains 270 words, total size 2 kb.

The Always Awesome BestoftheWeb notices the NYT making an asshat out of itself.

Between 1992 and 2008, "violent crime declined sharply all over the country," the New York Times observes during an editorial. One of the factors contributing to this decline was tougher sentences for criminals: "the number in prison for life without parole tripled from 12,453 to 41,095."

Only that's not how the Times presents this information. Instead, it commits the Butterfield fallacy:

From 1992 to 2008, the number in prison for life without parole tripled from 12,453 to 41,095, even though violent crime declined sharply all over the country during that period.

Even though! The Times opposes sentences of life without possibility of parole, saying that "a fair-minded society should not sentence anyone to life without parole except as an alternative to the death penalty." Needless to say, the Times also opposes the death penalty.

Opponents really do have a slippery slope in mind: Once capital punishment is gone, they'll try to do away with life without parole. If they succeed in that, we'd be surprised if they didn't start arguing that life sentences are too harsh altogether. To our mind, it all amounts to an excellent argument, if an unwitting one, against abolishing the death penalty.

If you think he's exaggerating look at Europe. The Norwegian Mass Murderer (who I won't name) can get a max sentence of 21 years and is eligible for parole. And that's not an isolated case! That's the slippery slope the NYT would travel.

You can get a free subscription to BestoftheWeb here.

Posted by: Open Blogger at 02:35 PM | Comments (89)
Post contains 279 words, total size 2 kb.

Fox News Watch seems to be worth watching this week (when is it even on? I thought Sunday).

First, Jim Pinkerton notes Newsbuster's report that MSNBC had completely avoided any mention of Solyndra.

And then Pinkerton and Judith Miller discuss liberals distancing themselves from Obama, and criticizing him in more dangerous terms than usual. That is, it's always easy for liberals to say Obama's not leftist enough. Nonsense, but that's the kind of thing they say to pull him further to the left. But to start questioning whether he knows what he's doing, or if he's even "serious" about his jobs bill -- that's tougher stuff.

We always see this, but usually not until after a failed election. The moment Martha Coakley loses, it's safe to say she's an idiot and a horrible campaigner and out of touch and so on. Same with David Weprin from NY9.

It's not merely safe to do this; it's necessary. The blame must always fall on the expendable; the disposable troops get the blame. The blame must never fall on the animating doctrine of the transnational progressive movement.

It's a tough thing, but you can throw a president under the bus. You can never throw liberalism itself under the bus.

Posted by: Ace at 01:28 PM | Comments (146)
Post contains 224 words, total size 2 kb.

The populist pap from people like Ross Perot and more recently Donald Trump about raising tariffs on foreign goods “to protect American jobs” is a real turn-off for me. Why? Because I can do the economics. Stick with me here, and you will be able to, too (but I promise there will be no math involved). From an economics standpoint, there is really no good argument for tariffs—from the consumer’s, or the producer’s standpoint—free trade means everyone can benefit… assuming our trading partners are actually engaging in free trade. more...

Posted by: Open Blogger at 01:09 PM | Comments (97)
Post contains 1948 words, total size 12 kb.