You don't say.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke acknowledged that Obamacare regulations have caused employers to hire part-time workers, rather than full-time employees, but refused to say if Congress should delay the lawÂ’s mandates.

“[O]ne thing that we hear, you know, in the commentary we get at the FOMC is that some employers are hiring part-time in order to avoid the mandate there,” Bernanke told Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind., during a House hearing. “So we have heard that.”

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney adopted the opposite position during the press briefing Tuesday. “I would say broadly that if you look at the economic data, the suggestion that the [Affordable Care Act] is reducing full-time employment is belied by the facts,” Carney said.

Yes, I'm sure Jay Carney is looking through all the economic data.

Posted by: Ace at 11:22 AM | Comments (162)
Post contains 146 words, total size 1 kb.

Wow.

Now let's note what this isn't: It's not actually witness testimony. Jeantel doesn't know just like you don't know and just like I don't know.

Well actually I know -- I know Martin threw the first punch and the only actually effective punches -- because I'm a blogger and I have a limited means of viewing, accessing, and even interacting with the past via a method I won't go into.

So this is just her supposition, which means just as much as anyone's, except mine, which is accurate because I was there but can't talk about it and just stop asking about it already.

But Jeantel did know Martin as a person. And she's not only not saying "I could never see Trayvon attacking someone," she's actually saying "Yes, based on my impressions of Trayvon Martin, I'd expect him to be the aggressor in a confrontation."

Oh, and since we're on the subject (are we ever off it?), O'Reilly & guests think that NBC is going to have to pay Zimmerman millions for their defamation, and O'Reilly isn't crying about that at all.

Much See TV: Al Sharpton will interview Rachel Jeantel tonight.

The closed captioning guy just hanged himself. He left this note: "Avenge me."

Posted by: Ace at 12:47 PM | Comments (467)
Post contains 225 words, total size 2 kb.

Well, obviously. But when the obvious is denied or overlooked, it's useful and necessary to say it.

For backstory, the other day Thomas Roberts gave a scripted Progressive Hero Speech on MSNBC, and if you can imagine such a thing, called for MSNBC to be even more hippy-dippy and hyper-ideological than it already is.

DonÂ’t we need to do more about our social contract with each other in this country when it comes to being others? Because, as we look at this, we can use this as a great pivot point to talk about race relations in this country.

But, being an “other,” whether it’s LGBT, because you’re suspected of being a pedophile and a rabid disease carrier.

And if you are a woman, well you donÂ’t have a right to your own body and your own reproductive health, because if you do youÂ’re a slut that wants to sleep around and use abortion as birth control.

And then, if youÂ’re Hispanic, you want to lay off the land and have anchor babies and you just want to lay off the land.

Isn’t that the — and I want to challenge this network: we had to have an “I am other” agenda and have a forum for it, because others need to unite to talk about this and figure out where we are going as a country.

The social contract that we have currently negotiated that is so wrong and how this is happening in a country where we have this huge group of people that– it’s supposed to be a melting pot, but we treat each other with such disdain it’s not even funny.

Well, Carolla's not having any part of this Clapper Moment from Roberts. If I know Carolla's basic take -- and I think I've do, I've heard it a few times -- it's this: There is racism. Racism is responsible for 15% of the Bad Outcomes black people experience in America.

On the other hand, a bad culture among underclass blacks is responsible for 85% of Bad Outcomes they experience.

So yeah, we can sit here jerking each other off in our Progressive Hero Speeches and relentlessly focus on the 15% it's Fun and Rewarding to talk about, and sure, you'll get your Standing Ovations from your fellow progressives for Daring to Say What Every Single One of Them "Dares" to Say.

Or we can talk about the things that cause 85% of the problems, which have nothing to do with whitey. But you won't get applause for that. In fact, some people might even take issue with you.

So that's why Carolla calls him a p*ssy -- because like any other coward, he wants to talk about the stuff that it's Easy and Rewarding to talk about, not the stuff that would actually have the most beneficial effect.

Sending the message that we’re broke — we have a broken moral compass and we have to have a dialogue about it to fix it is an insane and dangerous message to send, and you can listen to this pussy ass-wipe on MSNBC explaining to his co-host — it’s a weekend show. He’s filling in for the host. Hear him explain what kind of society we’ve crafted in 2013.”

Posted by: Ace at 10:44 AM | Comments (303)
Post contains 558 words, total size 3 kb.

@benk84 sent this to me earlier, noting that our unbiased media, which makes some errors but not because of partisanship, but merely because they can't resist some stories which are Too Good to Resist, is nevertheless managing quite well in resisting this one.

It gets worse, by the way. You say, "No way, it can't get worse." Well, you're wrong, as usual, so just shut up and read and stop embarrassing yourself all the time.

ABC News 10 in San Diego has learned that San Diego Mayor Bob "Filthy" Filner will be giving the keynote address at a benefit for sexual assault victims.

The "worse" part is this: the keynote speaking slot is a major downgrade from his previous planned role. Up until a few days ago, he was to be given a Major Award for His Selfless Crusade to Defend Women Against Sexual Assault such as the type of sexual assault he inflicts on his female staffers all the time.

The National Military Women Veterans Association of America had decided to honor Filner with a lifetime acheivment award "for his work on behalf of women veterans, including the issue of sexual assault. " But the group released a statement rescinding the award, stating "We do not tolerate sexual discrimination at any level within our society."

A Lifetime Achievement award...? If he actually raped a woman, would he get that with a Beyond the Call of Duty cluster?

So, they strip him of the award, and yet they still permit him to keynote a benefit for victims of sexual assault.

This is a "compromise" in the eyes of this undoubtedly super-left organization? Well, we won't give the serial sexual assaulter a Lifetime Achievement award honoring his many sexual assaults. But we still will give him the position of honor of delivering the keynote.

I suppose it's possible they plan an ambush. A tough confrontation, maybe. But I doubt it. We'll have to see.

Posted by: Ace at 09:32 AM | Comments (307)
Post contains 379 words, total size 2 kb.

Cohen sounds a bit silly as to hoodies being a "uniform" for criminals; he sounds like George Will decrying jeans.* A lot of people wear hoodies. Hell, I love a good hoodie.

That aside, he does attempt to "speak honestly" about race, just as Eric Holder said we needed to do.

Chiefly he speaks about the very high crime rates for young black males.

.Where is the politician who will own up to the painful complexity of the problem and acknowledge the widespread fear of crime committed by young black males? This does not mean that raw racism has disappeared, and some judgments are not the product of invidious stereotyping. It does mean, though, that the public knows young black males commit a disproportionate amount of crime. In New York City, blacks make up a quarter of the population, yet they represent 78 percent of all shooting suspects — almost all of them young men. We know them from the nightly news.

...

The problems of the black underclass are hardly new. They are surely the product of slavery, the subsequent Jim Crow era and the tenacious persistence of racism. They will be solved someday, but not probably with any existing programs. For want of a better word, the problem is cultural, and it will be solved when the culture, somehow, is changed.

In the meantime, the least we can do is talk honestly about the problem. It does no one any good to merely cite the number of stop-and-frisks involving black males without citing the murder statistics as well. Citing the former and not the latter is an Orwellian exercise in political correctness. It not only censors half of the story but also suggests that racism is the sole reason for the policy. This mindlessness, like racism itself, is repugnant.

Very often the most heated arguments concern situations where two statements, each of which points to a different conclusion, are completely true.

Consider abortions in the case of rape. The discussion is heated partly because two things are simultaneously true. Neither can be denied, and denial of a premise is what people usually do to win an argument.

In the case of abortions in cases of rape:

It is completely true that a baby conceived of rape did nothing at all wrong to "deserve" to be aborted.

It is, however, simultaneously true that the victim of rape did nothing wrong, either, and did not even assume the risk of pregnancy as a willing woman does, and it's also true that compelling her to carry her rapist's child to term is, in some way, prolonging the victimization for nine months.

As both of these things are true, and neither can be denied (well, they can be denied, but as former Senate hopeful Akin can tell you, you might sound pretty dumb in your denial), it creates a very hot environment for argumentation.

As neither side can really deny the other side's Key Premise, all people tend to do is just keep shouting their own Key Premise louder and louder, without ever acknowledging the conflicting premise.

I feel the same thing applies here with respect to race and crime.

It is undeniable that an innocent black kid who is suspected of being a criminal, and treated as if he were a criminal, is going to feel insulted by that, and angry about that, and I can't blame him. I think all conservatives, actually, can sympathize with his plight better, now that we're nearly officially second-class citizens ourselves.

On the other hand, to demand that people forget what they know is absurd: People know that young black males commit a greatly, greatly disproportionate amount of common crimes/street crimes, including the violent ones. To ask anyone to pretend they don't know this, especially to the extent of actually putting themselves at an elevated risk of being the victim of serious violent crime, for the sake of "not making people feel bad," is a demand so huge that people will always do what they're currently doing: completely ignoring this demand, as it's just ridiculous.

Blacks themselves routinely take unhappy note of this sad fact: yes, they say, they understand, perhaps moreso than any White Racist, that the chances of victimization by a young black male are substantially greater than as regards any other demographic cohort.

So what is the right course? One can't just glibly say "Well, the numbers say they're likely to be criminals, so treat 'em like criminals." That creates itself a class of victims: the wrongly suspected. But neither can one just pop off that anyone who thinks that a young black male might be more dangerous than the average citizen is a racist.

Or else the FBI crime statistics from 1968 to 2013 are all "racist."

A "real, honest discussion of race" would have to include both of these statements, the truth which cannot be denied.

And yet, the second statement is frequently denied, or at least no one asking for "real, honest discussions about race" is willing to talk about it, and will gladly encourage various Prog Furies to deliver punishments upon those who dare to Say Things Which Are True.

Here's a little prognostication on my part. You can call my psychic when this comes to pass: A week from now, when Eric Holder has had plenty of time to think about it and has probably been informed about it, Eric Holder will not warn his progressive bullyboys from savaging Richard Cohen, and will not clarify that an "honest discussion" must include some actual honesty at some point. He will chalk up the silencing of Cohen as a win.

Taranto discusses this in a column called, accurately enough, Shut Up and Speak Honestly-- which is Holder's real message. Shut Up for some, Speak Honestly for his ideological allies. Considering the conundrum -- that "racist" is an insult designed to shut down an avenue of conversation, and yet many people who cry racist are nevertheless honest about it (in as much as they do believe it), he observes that "honesty" isn't enough for conversation -- respect and willingness to actually engage issues is required.

But an honest conversation requires more than honesty. It requires a willingness to engage constructively with people who hold views with which one disagrees, or that one finds disagreeable. In that regard, Cohen measures up while his detractors fall short.

If America is a "nation of cowards," it is likely because many people with views similar to Cohen's prefer to avoid the subject rather than endure the unpleasantness and potential serious repercussions that come with the accusation of racism. Holder's call for honest conversation would have some force if he exhorted fellow liberals and fellow blacks to be sensitive to the reasons for these inhibitions. Absent that, it's more lecture than conversation.

Indeed, and that is of course what Holder's really calling for. Not a conversation, but a lecture, with some designated as Truth Tellers, and others designated as people who should just be quiet and accept some Wisdom.

* But I do know what he was getting at, even if he seized upon the wrong article of clothing. He's getting at the idea of class and Advertised Identity, which is a major complicating factor in any discussion about race.

Because it's not true that people are "afraid of young black men." No one would be afraid of, say, Wayne Brady, even if he were younger. Wayne Brady's Advertised Identity is not "thug."

Among the poor -- poor whites, poor blacks, poor Hispanics, poor "White Hispanics" -- there is a big difference between the Aspirational poor and the Accepting poor. A poor person who advertises himself as a striver, an achiever, is not usually perceived as a threat.

A poor person, on the other hand, who signals himself as part of the sad, cynical, violent thug culture -- and every race has some version of this -- is perceived as a threat. I might not be able to see a white guy's Neck Tattoos and Iron Cross earring at the same distance I can spot someone's skin color, but the moment I do see the Neck Tattoos and Iron Cross earring, I am in fact labeling that guy as "Likely threat, seems to advertise his identity as being based in Prison Culture. Do not approach."

There is a very big difference between people who advertise themselves as I've Got Nothin' to Lose and those who advertise themselves as I Do In Fact Have Something to Lose. The fact that the latter sort of person has skin in the game himself makes him nonthreatening -- he's not comfortable with impulsive life-changing criminal decisions either.

But the first sort of person is all but advertising he doesn't think much of his own life and therefore, of course, doesn't think much of others' lives, which is the dangerous thing.

And anyone who adopts the cultural signifiers of a population which moves back and forth from prison without being too discomfited about it -- whether it's blacks' prison-denim styling, or a white dude with Neck Tattoos -- is signaling that they aren't afraid of prison. And anyone who fails to read that as "...and therefore aren't much deterred by the prospect of imprisonment" is just an idiot.

Posted by: Ace at 08:15 AM | Comments (462)
Post contains 1594 words, total size 10 kb.

Accountability.

A former employee of Florida State Attorney Angela Corey's office plans to file a whistleblower lawsuit against George Zimmerman's prosecutors, his attorney told Reuters on Tuesday.

...

Ben Kruidbos, Corey's former director of information technology, was fired after testifying at a pre-trial hearing on June 6 that prosecutors failed to turn over potentially embarrassing evidence extracted from Martin's cell phone to the defense, as required by evidence-sharing laws.

"We will be filing a whistleblower action in (Florida's Fourth Judicial District) Circuit Court," said Kruidbos' attorney Wesley White, himself a former prosecutor who was hired by Corey but resigned in December because he disagreed with her prosecutorial priorities. He said the suit will be filed within the next 30 days.

...

Trial law requires prosecutors to share evidence with defense attorneys, especially if it helps exonerate defendants. The requirement is known as the Brady disclosure.

Kruidbos testified last month in a pre-trial hearing that he found photos on Martin's phone that included pictures of a pile of jewelry on a bed, underage nude females, marijuana plants and a hand holding a semi-automatic pistol.

Angela Corey claims Kruidbos "hacked" the pictures, and furthermore claims her office acted totes ethically.

Meanwhile, the Department of Justice coordinated with an ACORN-linked "student group" to rouse the rabble against Zimmerman.

None of the "student" activists are students, of course; they all work for a Florida corporation called Dream Defenders. One of them, named Baden, has very direct links to the Martin family lawyer:

Baden began working as an organizer (with Pendas) in college (8:50 to 9:00) and has held at least three organizing jobs. As first reported yesterday on Breitbart.com by Lee Stranahan, for at least two years (2005-06) Baden worked as “Head of Activism“ at Parks & Crump, the law firm currently representing Travon Martin’s family (as Stranahan details, she focused her paid activism work on a racially charged case involving the death of another African-American teenager, which provided the “playbook” for the Travon Martin case, and at one point she apparently helped lead a mob that blocked rush-hour traffic in Florida’s capitol).

That tip via @comradearthur, who says it just gets worse and worse. Indeed. The death of our nation has been community-organized.

Posted by: Ace at 06:30 AM | Comments (347)
Post contains 386 words, total size 3 kb.

Romance we much. And we much.

Al Sharpton has a new, decades-younger, attractive main squeeze.

The civil rights activist and MSNBC star, 58, is dating 35-year-old Aisha McShaw, a Westchester “personal stylist” who has been seen on Sharpton’s arm at several recent black-tie affairs, including the White House Correspondents Dinner in April and President Obama’s holiday party in December.

When she arrived in a form-fitting black and white dress with a sharp-suited Sharpton at the New York County Democratic Committee Award Ceremony on Monday night, the Daily News asked her to define her relationship with the civil rights powerhouse.

“I’m his girlfriend,” McShaw said before Sharpton intervened to shepherd her away from a reporter.

Posted by: Ace at 07:32 AM | Comments (449)
Post contains 138 words, total size 1 kb.

Happy Wednesday.

So, Liz Cheney, eh? I thought folks had enough of foreign policy interventionists like Obama, Bush 43 and Sens. McCain and Graham. Sen. Paul certainly is no fan: “When I heard Liz Cheney was running for Senate I wondered if she was running in her home state of Virginia." There was something undeniably ballsy about her announcement, though. After telling Sen. Enzi she wouldn't run if he did, she made her video announcement -- obviously planned well in advance -- a bare 30 minutes after he announced that he was running for reelection. This is gonna be a helluva fight.

Popehat has a formidable critique of the distasteful existence of Nancy Grace, no doubt spurred in part by the Zimmerman coverage.

Dementia in the aging is dropping, according to several major studies. If it is, this gives hope to quite a few people who had to watch their parents go through it and fear it in themselves. It also suggests that projections for elderly healthcare will need to be adjusted.

For all of Washington Post's efforts, a bare 16% say Gov. McDonnell should resign over his alleged ethical lapses in accepting gifts.

Regarding yesterday's post suggesting that being nasty isn't going to win the GOP any votes, if you think that depicting Sen. Rubio, who is not Mexican, in a sombrero against a Mexican flag background isn't a problem, well... there's really a great explanation for why you were surprised we lost in November. As I wrote way, way, way back in November when folks were probably too shell-shocked to actually read it, the GOP doesn't have a policy problem. It has a messaging one.

Democrats excel at this game. Both parties shuffle around a fairly stable political center, with their policies actually on the perimeter. The Democrats' policies are to the Left, but their messaging is centrist. The Republicans' policies are to the Right and so for the most part is their messaging. That's a problem when we need to attract swing voters.

You know who understands this really well? Sen. Paul. He opposed the Gang of 8 bill and he did it without making an ass of himself. It is entirely possible to do, the question is whether we have the will to do it.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:56 AM | Comments (539)
Post contains 387 words, total size 3 kb.

Pretty good stuff...

Zimmerman shocker: Carter backs the jury verdict and mentions prosecutorial over reach. Second look Jimmy Carter? Naa...

Mid-morning open thread

Posted by: Purple Avenger at 05:28 AM | Comments (274)
Post contains 30 words, total size 1 kb.

Theodore Roosevelt's Citizenship in a Republic Speech

He gave this speech in 1910 and it's best known for his 'Man in the Arena' passage:

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

But there's a whole bunch of goodness in the rest of the speech as well including this:

The very last thing an intelligent and self-respecting member of a democratic community should do is to reward any public man because that public man says that he will get the private citizen something to which this private citizen is not entitled, or will gratify some emotion or animosity which this private citizen ought not to possess. Let me illustrate this by one anecdote from my own experience. A number of years ago I was engaged in cattle-ranching on the great plains of the western Unite States. There were no fences. The cattle wandered free, the ownership of each one was determined by the brand; the calves were branded with the brand of the cows they followed. If on a round-up and animal was passed by, the following year it would appear as an unbranded yearling, and was then called a maverick. By the custom of the country these mavericks were branded with the brand of the man on whose range they were found. One day I was riding the range with a newly hired cowboy, and we came upon a maverick. We roped and threw it; then we built a fire, took out a cinch-ring, heated it in the fire; and then the cowboy started to put on the brand. I said to him, "It So-and-so's brand," naming the man on whose range we happened to be. He answered: "That's all right, boss; I know my business." In another moment I said to him: "Hold on, you are putting on my brand!" To which he answered: "That's all right; I always put on the boss's brand." I answered: "Oh, very well. Now you go straight back to the ranch and get whatever is owing to you; I don't need you any longer." He jumped up and said: "Why, what's the matter? I was putting on your brand." And I answered: "Yes, my friend, and if you will steal for me then you will steal from me."

He gave the speech to a French audience so the first few paragraphs are a review of American history but after that he really gets rolling.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 05:43 PM | Comments (859)
Post contains 1275 words, total size 13 kb.