The ten Republicans voting Nay: Amash, Barton, Duncan (TN), Gibson, Huelskamp, Jones, McKinley, Platts, Rehberg, Whitfield. (via @bdomenech)

This story from a couple of hours ago, before the vote.

"We have one of the most predictable economic crises in this country coming. It's a debt-driven crisis. And so we have an obligation -- not just a legal obligation but a moral obligation -- to do something about it," Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican, said Thursday morning. GOP leaders "think the key components are to get spending under control, reform our entitlement programs" and help stimulate economic growth.

He's making the appeal he made before in his video (second video posted below) -- What if Congress knew about the coming financial meltdown of 2008 for ten or fifteen or twenty or thirty years, and took no action to stop it?

Well, that's what the entitlement crisis is. They've known, conclusively, about this approaching problem since at least the mid-80s. They pegged the crisis to the year. We know exactly what happens when the massive cohort of Baby Boomers begins drawing on monies that don't exist.

Ryan demolished Debbie Wasserman-Schultz's typical airhead demagoguery (first video below).

(via @melissatweets)

more...

Posted by: Ace at 11:29 AM | Comments (131)
Post contains 217 words, total size 2 kb.

The music. It's so precious.

The breathy college-radio voices.

The houses which are absurdly small.

News account here.

With grand designs on minimizing their housing footprint, Christopher Smith and Merete Mueller have spent the last 10 months building the tiny home of their dreams.

"It's 19 feet long wall to wall,” Smith said. “The interior square-footage is about 125 square feet.”

The interior layout consists of a sitting area, kitchen and bathroom. A vaulted ceiling makes room for a sleeping loft that can accommodate a queen-size mattress.

“The interior looks a lot bigger than the exterior,” Mueller said.

A house with 125 square feet.

This isn't a lifestyle; it's a hobby. You can own a Chevy Volt... if you're rich enough to have a couple of other cars. Sure, you can then designate the Volt as the Car For Quick Jaunts To The Post Office.

Other people, who don't view cars as toys or luxury goods, will need more robust cars.

And that's what I suspect with these guys. It's a cute stunt, trying to outdo each other's fashion choices -- your house is 125 square feet? I'll make mine 89 square feet! I win! -- but I strongly suspect these guys have a lot of money, and do not need to fear a large chunk of their net wealth being tied up in a silly property that they might have to unload in a hurry if they realize they can't live in 89 square feet.

By the way, I note these guys don't seem to have children.

Thanks to krakatoa.

Posted by: Ace at 10:56 AM | Comments (411)
Post contains 273 words, total size 2 kb.

Guy has two modes. Higher Taxes Mode, and Higher Spending Mode.

President Barrack Obama used the Rose Garden today to make a poll-tested demand for higher tax payments from oil companies, to repeat controversial claims about U.S. oil reserves and to urge more spending on green-tech companies and on biofuels, such as algae.

Obama campaign-style appearance was intended to highlight a move by Senate Democrats to exempt oil companies from routine investment tax credits.

...

“The biggest oil companies are raking in record profits… [they’re] also getting billions, billions, a year in taxpayer subsidies… It’s like hitting the American people twice,” he declared from a podium.

...

“We should be using that money to double-down on investments in clean energy technologies that have never been more promising. Investments in wind power and solar power and biofuels; in fuel-efficient cars and trucks and homes and buildings.”

We've gotta get him out. I can't take it.

Strictly as a matter of mental health for myself, I need him out.

Posted by: Ace at 09:26 AM | Comments (493)
Post contains 218 words, total size 1 kb.

While the media focuses on the case of Staff Sgt. Robert Bales, it is worth remembering that he is the overwhelming exception.

Spc. Dennis Weichel of the Rhode Island National Guard is far more representative of the selfless sacrifice and honor exhibited by the US military during 2 wars and over 10 years of fighting. But even within the ranks of heroic actions, Spc. Weichel's sacrifice stands out.

The official Pentagon news release says he died "from injuries suffered in a noncombat related incident." But there is much more to the story. Weichel, 29, of Providence, died saving the life of a little girl.

According to the Rhode Island National Guard and the U.S. Army, Weichel was in a convoy a week ago with his unit in Laghman Province, in northeast Afghanistan. Some children were in the road in front of the convoy, and Weichel and other troops got out to move them out of the way.

Most of the children moved, but one little girl went back to pick up some brass shell casings in the road. Afghan civilians often recycle the casings, and the girl appeared to aim to do that. But a Mine-Resistant Ambush-Protected vehicle was moving toward her, according to Lt. Col. Denis Riel of the Rhode Island National Guard.

MRAPs, as they are known, usually weigh more than 16 tons.

Weichel saw the massive truck bearing down on the girl and grabbed her out of the way. But in the process, the armored truck ran him over, Riel said.

The little girl is fine. Weichel died a short time later of his injuries.

Specialist Weichel leaves behind his fiance and three children.

Far more Iraqis and Afghans have been saved by men and women like Spc. Weichel than killed in cold blood by rogue soldiers. Some want "crazy, murderous vets" be the narrative of the War on Terror. We owe to those who served honorably and sacrificed so much, to make sure the truth wins out in the end.

Oh God...I was looking for a photo of Spc. Weichel and found this story of him surprising his kids this Christmas.

Posted by: DrewM at 06:03 AM | Comments (418)
Post contains 384 words, total size 4 kb.

Happy Thursday.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:53 AM | Comments (479)
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.

CALLING ALL TROLLS

Come to me my babies - let me quell your pain.

Tonight is your night, this love is your love. You are part of us now.

Let this troll chow and kool-aid beverage of your choice signify a new reconciliation.

Lay down that burden and forget the old ways, brothers, and all the old hatreds.

Just close your glazzies and awake to a world of no more pain.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:04 PM | Comments (869)
Post contains 787 words, total size 9 kb.

So what if Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer fumbled today on the question of federal coercion, and the "Administrative Procedure Act."

Well, that conservative justice Antonin Scalia made a joke about the "Cornhusker Kickback" and that isn't even in the law anymore!

Even though
they got ben
nelson's vot

the point
is SCOTUS
ain't congress

save 20 percent of your body
temp and live
I miss AlGore

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 04:35 PM | Comments (237)
Post contains 73 words, total size 1 kb.

will it be
mitt
rombley .?

none can say
but
the anser is YES

bears

Posted by: Ace at 04:08 PM | Comments (125)
Post contains 37 words, total size 1 kb.

Jose Canseco has a twitter feed now. Isn't that marvelous?

Well, he was babbling nonsensically today. But then I realized he was actually writing some sort of postmodernist poem.

I've added some formatting -- I've made it a "concrete" poem, as I think it should be, by adding white space and a visual motif to it. I added some punctuation and italics and boldface. All the correct punctuation is mind; the lack of punctuation, and the Section 8 period use, is per Canseco's original.

Otherwise, this is work of poetry is entirely Jose Canseco.

It's called "how do we stop global warming"

how do we stop global warming

reduce

reuse

recycle

morons

class in session

i complete you
of to practice for my playboy celebrity golf tournament

1 more stop

global warming tip

.turn your home heat all

off at nite .

saves $ an energy

and lowers your body temp

so

u will L I V E

20% longer

flanel pajamas morons

share body heat

like the pioneers did

(even in snow...)

hole families

used to sleep

in one big bed

and produce no waste

how did we go from their

to killing polar bears

in

100 years...

al gore was

a head of his time .

i miss him

rest in peace buddy

hug

for

u

-- Jose Canseco, 2012

Posted by: Ace at 03:32 PM | Comments (227)
Post contains 232 words, total size 1 kb.

I haven't seen anyone call this out. It's surprising, because Breyer is of course an all-out Obamabot liberal, and has been carrying the administration's water in this case for three days running.

But here, he learns that one of his assumptions -- what he'd already decided he'd base his decision to uphold ObamaCare -- is in fact false. He sounds kind of angry to find out he's wrong.

Here's the context: The argument concerns whether the Secretary of Health may cut off all Medicaid funds if states do not follow the federal government's order to greatly expand Medicaid to cover the young and able-bodied.

Because the Secretary could cut off all funds -- billions and billions -- if its orders were not followed, the challengers of the law say it's "coercive," as a legal matter, and hence unconstitutional because the federal government coercing the state governments is incompatible with the idea of federalism, independent state governments, and state sovereignty.

Now, Breyer assumes two things:

1, that the Administrative Procedure Act (the APA) would forbid a Secretary from actually doing this, as he feels that act contains a requirement of reasonableness in the Secretary's actions, and,

2, that no Secretary has ever actually threatened a state with this, or ever would. That is, that while this is hypothetically something the Secretary could do, no Secretary ever has or ever will. So it's all just silly.

Now what happens is that a letter is presented by Clement, written by the Secretary of Health (I think) to the state of Arizona, threatening a total cut-off of funds. (I think -- maybe the letter was about the immigration law. Point is, it threatened a cutoff of funds.)

Later, Verilli refuses to say that Obama's Secretary of Health wouldn't do the same if states refused to comply with ObamaCare's Medicaid expansion.

Okay?

And then Breyer sounds butthurt that this letter undermines the assumption he was trying to advance as a reason to uphold the law.

To hear the exchange, download the file. The exchange starts around 57:25. That's not Breyer at first; it's Roberts. But start there for context.

Breyer starts in with his big booming sing-song pretentious affected voice at 58:49 and continues back and forth for a couple of minutes after that, until around 1:02.00. He asks "Why are you so reluctant?" to simply state the Secretary would never take such a step. Verrilli won't guarantee that.

He also sounds like he's begging Verrilli to just say what Breyer wants him to say so he can base his decision on it.

One point that's made is that it doesn't matter if the Secretary actually has ever cut off funds; simply being able to threaten it is itself coercive.

Corrected: I originally said Verrilli admitted that the Secretary might cut off all funds, or threaten to. Actually, Clement introduced the letter mentioned. Then Verrilli was asked about it.

The Legal Framework: Let me explain this -- I just had a big refresher myself.

The government can only do some things according to the Constitution. A great many things it can't do.

And yet it does them anyway. It does so by creating a "voluntary" partnership with the states, then provides money for the states to do what the federal government says they should do.

This is how the enumerated powers idea is evaded.

It is said that Congress' spending power is plenary and unlimited (boy, is it ever!!) so it has a lot of power there. It can spend if it likes -- and if it wants to bribe states to do things, then it can do that.

A limitation on this power, however, is that Congress cannot do through the spending power what it would be forbidden to do by other parts of the Constitution. It cannot give orders to the states -- the state governments are not inferior governments, taking orders from the central one.

So if a so-called "spending" power exercise achieved via a "voluntary" partnership with the states is actually coercive -- it violates the whole idea that the federal government may get involved in state business only if the state voluntarily agrees to it.

The challengers' argument is that the Medicaid expansion -- in which the Secretary of Health may cut off all funding for states if they do not participate -- is coercive. The fig leaf of it being "voluntary" is stripped away, and it is revealed that the federal government is simply doing what it is forbidden to do -- give orders to inferior state governments.

Posted by: Ace at 02:46 PM | Comments (252)
Post contains 805 words, total size 5 kb.