• Cooke: Addled By The AR-15
  
• Review Team Will Probe Capitol Police On The Alleged 'Stand Down' Controversya
  
• The Price Of Politics
  
• Shootings Up 10% In NYC After Stop And Frisk Was Ruled Unconstitutional
  
• VDH: The Decline Of College
  
• Assad Now Wants A Billion Dollars From The US To Remove The Chemicals
  
• Gennifer Flowers Is Back In The News
  
• Taranto: Tired Guns
  
• SC School District Responds Complaints About Textbook With Second Amendment Error
  
• IRS Employees Were Aware That Obama Wanted The Tea Party Targeted
  
• "I Have No Doubt That If Marty Was Armed He Would Be Alive"
  
• Creepy New Opt Out Campaign For Obamacare
  
• Now Is Not The Time For New Gun Laws
  
• New Study Says Threat Of Man-Made Global Warming Is Greatly Exaggerated
  
• New Australian PM Abolishes Climate Watchdog
  
• Three Men Stop A Purse Snatcher
  
• This Kid Is A Real Mensch
  
• Obama Will Not Negotiate With Republicans But He'll Negotiate With Putin (Video)
  
• Japan's PM Wants Fukishima Plant Scrapped
  
• Rare Condition Causes People To Brew Beer In Their Own Belly
  

Follow me on twitter.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 05:25 AM | Comments (176)
Post contains 182 words, total size 3 kb.

Oh my, the brave Republicans of the House of Representatives didn't even manage to go a full day without wetting their pants over the Continuing Resolution and ObamaCare. You know they haven't even brought it to the floor yet before whining that big, mean Ted Cruz threw them under the bus.

Here's the statement that Cruz, Mike Lee and Marco Rubio released. The part that seems to have the Brave Sir Robins of the GOP upset is this part from Cruz.

“Today's announcement that the House will vote to defund Obamacare is terrific news,” said Sen. Cruz. “Just a few weeks ago, this was deemed impossible. We commend House leadership and House Republicans for listening to the people and for taking decisive action to stop Obamacare, the biggest job-killer in America. Harry Reid will no doubt try to strip the defund language from the continuing resolution, and right now he likely has the votes to do so. At that point, House Republicans must stand firm, hold their ground, and continue to listen to the American people. President Obama has already granted Obamacare exemptions to big corporations and Members of Congress; he should not threaten to shut down the government just to deny those same exemptions to hard-working American families."

Emphasis mine.

That bastard!

Harry Reid isn't just going to fold on day one? Is that what people were expecting? If you were, you're an idiot. Of course he's either going to strip out the defund language or more likely he'll just pass his own CR that spends whatever he wants and funds fully funds the Affordable Care Act. Everyone knew that the point was to create pressure through the threat of a shutdown or an actual one to force Democrats to accept the GOP's terms. Building public support for defnding it during the run-up to and possibly even during the shutdown was the whole point (read this for suggestions on the messaging tactics the GOP should use). It would force the public to make a choice and give them a chance to put their anti-Obama feelings into practice. As such it was always going to be on the House GOP to "stand firm" because they are the majority. They are the only ones who can apply that pressure by not caving. Are House GOP members seriously asking us to believe they didn't know that?

There's nothing Ted Cruz or anyone in the Senate minority can do about Reid's majority. A majority that didn't just appear yesterday, we all knew it was there. If House members want to see the Senate defund caucus move some votes, then maybe Rubio can reach out to his amnesty buddies across the aisle for some help. I mean surely they owe him a little something for giving them cover from the right on that bill, don't they? Isn't that how bi-partisanship is supposed to work?

What Cruz, etc can do is filibuster but that's going to be a bit tricky.

If Reid brings up the House CR and the GOP filibusters it, they will be filibustering a bill with the House defund language in it (thanks to @AG_Conservative for that link). Reid can leave it in until after the last 60 vote threshold is passed and then strip that language out so long as he files his amendment prior to the cloture vote and it's ruled germane (which it would be because it is). Now there's a reason he likely won't do that. If he does he would force members to vote on the amendment to remove the defund language. That would put some of his members in the position of voting for ObamaCare or if they voted against it the opposition to ObamaCare would be "bi-partisan" and hurt the narrative that this is just a GOP show. Once the amendment passes the bill could then pass with a simple majority.

more...

Posted by: DrewM at 06:21 AM | Comments (205)
Post contains 1256 words, total size 8 kb.

Well, happy Thursday.

It's not over yet, but it's frustrating to see Senate conservatives' Obamacare defunding attempt go exactly the way I predicted. I said don't do this because we know GOP House members don't want a shutdown -- they've been consistent about saying they don't for a month now. I said don't do this because the House will sooner or later (probably sooner) cave and give Obama a clean CR. I said don't do this because it could imperil the sequester cuts. I said don't do this because the GOP will lose leverage for the debt ceiling fight. I said don't do this because it will hurt the fight for an Obamacare delay. I said don't do this because it will make the GOP look stupid. I said don't do this because it could hurt our chances in 2014.

Well, conservative senators and outside groups made enough ruckus that the House decided to stage a little demonstration. The House GOP planned to give the Senate conservatives just what they asked for: a CR that zeroes out Obamacare funding.

And then -- before the House even had a chance to vote on the defunding resolution, before Senate conservatives even attempted to rally their colleagues -- Sen. Cruz decided to throw the House under the bus, declaring that the Senate will likely defeat any defunding resolution that the House passes.

House GOP members are rightly pissed. “Gee, thanks for the support,” Rep. Trey Radel, R-Fla., said Wednesday. They said they didn't want to do this. Sen. Cruz, who is apparently responsible for doing nothing except running his mouth, insisted they do it anyway while he sits on his hands in the Senate. And here we are.

And the House GOP is not alone in thinking a shutdown is a bad idea. Senate GOP members are also watching this with a bit of horror. Sen. Flake thinks an unpopular shutdown will help rescue Obamacare. Sens. Coburn and Toomey also oppose a shutdown.

To many Republicans, it always looked as though the defund campaign had less to do with attacking Obamacare than it did with attacking the Republicans who will inevitably need to vote to keep the government open—even if they achieved some modest victory on Obamacare.

It sure did. And it still does. House Republicans had said early in the week that they'd look for a "Plan B" for if the Senate refused to defund. In light of Cruz's preemptive collapse, a lot of members are going to look for that Plan B now.

[ RSS]

[iTunes]

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 03:00 AM | Comments (332)
Post contains 433 words, total size 3 kb.

Let's Party Like It's 1989

Because after 5 years of Obama it is 1989 income-wise.

A Census Bureau report released on Tuesday reveals that the typical American family now earns less than it did in 1989. In 1989, median household income was $51,681 (in current dollars). In 2012, median household income was $51,017.

Poverty levels in 2012 also climbed to 46.5 million Americans-15% of the country-from 46.2 million in 2011. As Washington Post economics writer Neil Irwin put it, "This isn't a lost decade for economic gains for Americans. It is a lost generation."

The 1% Are Again Getting Richer. Should the 99% Really Care?

Well I've never been bothered by this kind of inequality statistic since I've always figured that 1) the wealthy will always do well since they have access to better resources, info, tools, expertise etc. and 2) the pie isn't fixed - every extra dollar Trump makes does not make me poorer.

But the mere existence of inequality is an obsession of the Left and occupies a large part of their mind space. Hell their mental living room is mostly filled with constant concern over what the top 1% are up to - a population smaller than San Antonio who they'll likely never meet or interact with in any way.

But even an unabashed right-wing capitalist like myself has to pause for a second after seeing a chart like this:

Looking at the upper right you can see that the top 10% of earners took in 50.4% of all income last year, the highest share recorded since 1917 when the government began collecting data. That's a pretty huge differential and no doubt it sticks in the craw of a lot of people. But on the other hand is it really that much of a problem?

Well James Pethokoukis makes a good argument that as a dramatic a ratio as this is it's ultimately due to market forces rather than say cronyism or corruption. Nor is it necessarily coming at the expense of the 99% or apparently limiting the economic mobility of those in the non-1%. So maybe not an issue after all.

And even if it were an issue,  all the proposed solutions to it by economists (top income tax rates > 75%, confiscatory inheritance taxes, etc.) would likely cause more harm to the average person than the income inequality itself.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:37 PM | Comments (467)
Post contains 1096 words, total size 12 kb.

New study suggests, sort of, what most people would expect -- that anger travels more rapidly online than any other emotional state.

new study supports what plenty of us who hang out on the Internet pretty much figured to be true: Anger is the most viral emotion on the Internet. The examination of how we humans are influenced by friends on social media, conducted by researchers at Beihang University in China, found that friends and followers are far more likely to share or echo angry sentiments than messages containing sadness, disgust or even joy.

And speaking of, some Gen Yer angrily denounces that article I had yesterday explaining/baiting the Gen Yers.

And speaking of, Piers Morgan wants to give you an aneurysm, like in Scanners, except not through psionic power, but simply by being an enormous choad.

Piers Morgan likes to be the centre of attention. “I’ve always been at the heart of stuff, wanting to take risks and challenge myself and not be afraid of failing. God knows I’ve had some catastrophic failures, but I’ve always learnt from them and always moved on quite quickly.” Ten years ago, as editor of the Daily Mirror, he campaigned noisily against the Iraq war. Now, as host of Piers Morgan Live, a prime-time CNN show broadcast around the world from New York, he is taking on America’s gun lobby in rumbustious style.
...

His hour-long slot on CNN – a mix of breaking news and celebrity chat – doesn’t enjoy anything like those numbers when it airs in the United States, but Morgan stresses its international reach (“Ahmadinejad [Iran’s former president] told me he watches CNN regularly”). The programme has given him a platform to launch a crusade against guns.

Does he think he’s making a difference to public opinion in the States? “To the level of debate and to the fact the debate has carried on,” he says. “But I’ve made absolutely zero difference so far in terms of changes to the law because they are, in Congress, utterly gutless about guns.”

Not long after we met, Aaron Alexis, 34, of Fort Worth, Texas, shot dead 13 people at a naval installation in Washington DC. On that evening’s show, Morgan was involved in a heated exchange: “I just boil over when I hear these gun lobbyists calmly insisting the only answer is more guns, when that just clearly makes the situation even worse. I despair for America right now. The gun debate is so entrenched on either side, I fear nothing will ever get done.”

Whatever. I just think this reveals so much about his personality and sense of himself:

Morgan’s closeness to Labour’s most recent prime minister – “he came round to my house in LA to watch Arsenal” – makes his dismissal of Ed Miliband all the more striking. “When you see what he did to his brother, you wouldn’t trust him with the family silver. He’s the most ruthless political animal I’ve ever seen. I’d be very surprised if Ed Miliband’s ever prime minister.” Ouch. Then, as with most others he criticises, he adds: “I’ve nothing against him.”

Obviously.

Weird/creepy story you'll be seeing fictionalized on CSI soon enough.

And speaking of that -- chimerism is back in the news, for some reason. Pretty wild stuff if you're not acquainted with the idea -- some people have different DNA in some parts of their body than others. (Hence, "chimerism," like a chimera made of different animals.)

One woman once had her kids taken away from her when a routine test demonstrated she was not a genetic match for any of her kids. They accused her of having kidnapped them or swapped them.

After a lot of heart-ache and suspicion, they finally realized her blood's DNA differed from the DNA in the rest of her body (including in her eggs).

and from steve_in_hb, Big Bang Theory A Capella: more...

Posted by: Ace at 04:17 PM | Comments (430)
Post contains 656 words, total size 5 kb.

Wasn't this Maureen Dowd's go-to spin in 2009? Why yes it was. And now even she's abandoned it.

Welcome to Politico, where an article which ostensibly diagnoses What's Wrong With Obama quickly becomes yet another exercise in He's Too Awesome for Us. (Link to Breitbart.)

Posted by: Ace at 03:47 PM | Comments (192)
Post contains 69 words, total size 1 kb.

I guess they're tired of being called the Surrender Caucus.

They seem to be saying Cruz and Lee are passing the buck, but this just seems to be passing the buck back.

Wouldn't it be better for the House, where Republicans rule, to simply fight this using the power they actually do have, rather than kicking it to the Senate where they don't? This sort of "You do it then" thing might be useful as far as positioning but it does concede most of the ground to Obama.

As for the open fight: It's an argument that needs to actually happen, instead of forever being stage-managed and hidden away.

This is a genuine argument. It is dividing the party (to the extent I'm not sure it's really an intact party at this point).

Everyone knows this is a huge and emotional fight and there's no sense covering it up.

At the moment I have no idea of who's right or what-not. I have no idea if these guys' claims that Cruz and Lee are just going to surrender and "not fight" or whatever is true, or if this is just their idea of payback or what.

Their implication is that Cruz and Lee are merely posturing, demanding others "fight" while they sit back and don't. We'll see about that. (I imagine they will. Up to the point of blocking the CR by sustaining a filibuster? Ah, there's the problem.)

But it seems like a big enough story to run without knowing any of that -- a full-on intraparty brawl.

Thanks to @johnekdahl.

Update: You can't filibuster a Continuing Resolution, I'm hearing from the commenters, so what Cruz and Lee are expected to do when Reid strips the defunding part of out of the CR, I don't know.

Ehhh... now I hear they could filibuster, except if it were passed via reconciliation.

I obviously don't know.

More: Sean Duffy did the same thing on his FaceBook page.

Posted by: Ace at 02:36 PM | Comments (326)
Post contains 411 words, total size 3 kb.

I saw this story minutes after I did the Chipotle piece, but didn't want to stomp myself.

But now you Dicks!!11! are talking about it, so here you go.

One of the first teams of heavily armed police to respond to Monday's shooting in Washington DC was ordered to stand down by superiors, the BBC can reveal.

A tactical response team of the Capitol Police, a force that guards the US Capitol complex, was told to leave the scene by a supervisor instead of aiding municipal officers.

The Capitol Police department said senior officials were investigating.

...

"I don't think it's a far stretch to say that some lives may have been saved if we were allowed to intervene," a Capitol Police source familiar with the incident told the BBC.

I'm doubtful. I sort of wonder if this isn't a mistake in the timeline (i.e., they were told to stand down because Aaron Alexis was already down).

I have to say I am really wondering what the hell the reasoning would be here.

If this is some bullshit like "the locals wanted the takedown," oh man. Oh man.

Video: I think this is a video report from a local DC station.

Thanks to Tasker.

Posted by: Ace at 01:47 PM | Comments (187)
Post contains 246 words, total size 2 kb.

David Harsanyi calls it "preposterous," which I suppose is true enough, but then, it's an advertisement.

The Onion just made me actually chuckle for once with a headline. Hey, advertising is inherently preposterous.

It's not so much that the ad is preposterous is that it's so... Ruthless. The ad essentially calls all of Chipotle's competitors murderers and pedophiles. It really pushes the line as far as disparaging competitors. It's one thing to do a cooked-up Taste Test. But this employs all the tricks of the greatest propaganda medium ever created -- moving pictures + sound -- and mixes them together with what Harsanyi suggests is food paranoia to attack all fast-food rivals as monsters.

I find it interesting in a science-fiction way: Will this be how advertising is done in the future? Basically the fast-food commercial equivalent of the infamous Daisy Ad?

Probably! Why not. We are constantly bombarded with huckster messaging. We tune it all out. To get attention, you have do a message really well, and it helps to go outrageous and dark and vicious with it.

If you want attention, pick a fight. That's an old bit of wisdom in the old newspaper trades, I think.

Harsanyi takes Chipotle to task for an attack on modern agribusiness...

As big a fan as I am of Chipotle’s brand of fast food – fighting for the little guy with a mere 1,500 restaurants and $800 million in revenue last year! – I enjoy it best without self righteousness that taps into paranoia about food, namely genetically modified crops, Big Ag and factory farming.

What it doesn’t do is tell us where “food comes from.” The Chipotle Scarecrow slogs to his miserable job at a smoke-spewing factory where nothing grows but caged chickens and cows. For some strange reason, in this imaginary world, government subsidized Big Agriculture chooses to leave massive swaths of land fallow or desolate, when, in fact, where food actually comes from, farm productivity has increased dramatically over the past decades and the resources required to keep production high has declined. Not exactly the stuff of dystopia.

That's true, and yet we really don't know the effects of growth hormones and various synthesized chemfeeds fed to animals which ultimately wind up inside of us. Eh. I'm not really in a panic about it, but I can't say I've done the Science myself and determined that all of this is Good For You.

There's a question here as to the proper conservative take. Conservatives appreciate tradition and the old ways and are skeptical of the new. But is it really a conservative take to champion newfangled ways of farming (including exciting new uses for chemicals and hormones) that got their start sometime between the 30s and 60s?

That's not terribly old, actually. That's pretty recent.

I'm actually not taking sides; I'm sort of in the "I don't care" camp. I do know the modern tomato, the beefsteak, was bred for reasons other than taste (the thick, rubbery skin protects it in transport) and it does in fact taste like it was bred for efficiency, not taste.

Harsanyi is quite right to push back against silly elements of food puritanism, and put in a good word for the man who saved a Billion Human Lives, but I don't think I have to uncritically accept every efficiency-driven technique a large corporation chooses to utilize.

Eh, I don't care. I just think the ad is interesting. Not because it's a good piece of filmmaking (though it is that), but because it looks like a glimmer of The Future.

And I'm not saying The Future will be a good place, as mega-corporations hire psychologists and gifted artists to craft more and more aggressive and emotionally stirring propaganda works for cars, beer, processed food, and birth control pills. But it's interesting to catch a glimpse of it anyway.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 12:59 PM | Comments (259)
Post contains 672 words, total size 5 kb.

Yeah, you live that image.

You have all displeased me in one way or another and now this is what you get.

But give it a read. Johnathan V. Last calls it "Juicebox Kremlinology." It's a little peek into how the New Class operates.

I know my blogging sucks this week but I am seriously run-down and getting sick from it. Not super-sick, just that sort of sick you start getting when your sleep is bad. Like where your body and metabolism just start mounting slow-down protests and start engaging in petty sabotages.

Oh by the way I thought yesterday was Wednesday all day and I kept thinking "Hump day! Two more days! Whoo-hoo!" and then I checked the calendar and got a big fat slap in the face from Tuesday.

So yeah my brain isn't really working.

Posted by: Ace at 11:16 AM | Comments (228)
Post contains 154 words, total size 1 kb.