Everyone loves and respects Thomas Sowell so it's disappointing to see him join the "shut up and get in line" wing of the GOP.

In making the case that conservative sponsored primary fights are endangering the GOP chances to take the Senate he adopts plenty of pithy talking points but shuts his eyes to a whole lot of history.

Only Republican control of the Senate can rein in the lawless Obama administration, which can otherwise load up the federal courts with lawless judges, who will be dismantling the rule of law and destroying the rights of the people for decades after Barack Obama himself is long gone from the White House.

Once that happens, even a future Republican majority, led by people with the kind of ideological purity that the Republican dissidents want, cannot undo the damage.

What is this ideological purity Sowell and so many of his fellow establishment apologists speak of? Is it mere "purity" to desire a Republican party that works to shrink government or at the very least stops its growth? Is "ideological purity" a vice while "ideological flexibility" that leads Republicans to join with Democrats to peruse policies such as amnesty, bailouts and supporting nominees like Eric Holder and Sonya Sotomayor, is a virtue? Is the judgement of people who supported candidates like Trey Grayson, Robert Bennett, Charlie Crist and Arlen Specter over Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Marco Rubio and Pat Toomey beyond question and challenge?

This year’s elections and the 2016 presidential election may be among the most important elections in the history of this country and can determine what kind of country this will be for years — and even generations — to come.

Those Republicans who seem ready to jeopardize their own partyÂ’s chances of winning these two crucial elections by following a rule-or-ruin fight against fellow Republicans may claim to be following their ideals. But headstrong self-righteousness is not idealism, and it is seldom a way to advance any cause.

Yes, yes. Every election is THE MOST IMPORTANT IN HISTORY! This isn't a reason not to try and push the party in a direction amenable to the base but to simply a way to confer lifetime appointments to those who have won a single election at some point in the distant mists of time.

The argument used to be, if you want to change the party run in primaries. Now that people have taken up that challenge the argument seems to be, if you want to change the party wait until an unimportant time in American history. And spoiler: There never is an unimportant time.

Politics, like war, is a question of power. If you donÂ’t have power, you can make fiery speeches or even conduct attention-getting filibusters, but that does not fundamentally change anything. And it has accomplished nothing in this case.

This argument treats conservative insurgents as children who simply want attention from the adults. What it ignores is that the conservative insurgency was born as a reaction to what the GOP did with power the last time they had it.

We all know the story by now...there was a huge increase in domestic spending including one of the largest expansions of the welfare state (Medicare Part D) under George W. Bush and Republican controlled House and Senate. And no, it wasn't simply because of 9/11.

When confronted by its spendthrift ways, the Bush administration argues that much of the increase in nondefense spending stems from higher homeland security spending. It's true that most homeland security spending is tallied under nondefense discretionary spending. Yet when homeland security spending is separated out, the increase in discretionary spending is still huge: 36 percent on Bush's watch.

I know it's become fashionable for some to ignore this history and HOPE that the GOP will CHANGE if given power again but when it comes to politicians, I'm not the trusting kind. I've written before that I think some of the primary targets are the wrong ones and that there's a danger in picking fights you can't win but that's an argument over tactics (as the GOP types like to remind everyone). What I don't agree with are the notions that somehow the real bad actors here are the ones who remember history and want to make the GOP more responsive to conservative concerns.

The most damning point against this whole argument is that it's simply not true. There aren't nearly as many challenges as the Shut Up! caucus want to pretend there are. Look who isn't getting any serious challenge from the dreaded "outside groups"...Lamar Alexander, Susan Collins and Lindsey Graham.

If this minor level of challenge is unacceptable to the party then what they are saying is you may donate, volunteer and vote but you simply can no voice in actually selecting candidates.

Professor Sowell knows well the economic rule that if you want more of something you subsidize it and if you want less you tax it. Think of the primaries as a tax on the GOP history of big spending and support for big but not quite as big government as the Democrats want. But hey, if you're a fan of big spending so long as the GOP is doing it, have at it.

Posted by: DrewM at 05:50 AM | Comments (335)
Post contains 891 words, total size 6 kb.

• USAToday Fact Check: Obama is "mixing and matching" his Obamacare stats, giving mistaken impression of costs.
  
• "Health industry officials say ObamaCare-related premiums will double in some parts of the country."
  
• Healthcare[.]gov was down for about 30 minutes yesterday due to "human error."
  
• Obamacare plans don't include coverage at many of the nation's top cancer centers.
  
• WSJ: tax experts predict mass confusion over Obamacare mandate penalties. (paywalled)
  
• Obama manufacturing hubs struggle to create jobs.
  
• DOJ IG: Officials, including AG Holder, touted false data on fighting mortgage fraud even after learning of error.
  
• Ethics group wants investigation into why the Democratic Pennsylvania Attorney General dropped charges against Democratic leaders recorded taking bribes.
  
• Delaware Sup. Ct. unanimously rules the ban on firearms in public housing unconstitutional.
  
• Here's a map and description of all the currently-pending marriage cases around the country.
  

Follow me on twitter, where I put up news tweets like these almost every weekday between 9 and 11 am.

Oh, and I plumbed the depths of the soul-sucking horror of the pro-abortion left:

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 05:08 AM | Comments (213)
Post contains 195 words, total size 3 kb.

Happy Wednesday. How happy are folks? Yeah.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus had a good column at CNN's website yesterday describing the committee's new year-round ground game and the reasons for the changes to the 2016 primary schedule.

It's the story of our field staffers across the country -- state directors, data directors, and Hispanic, black, and Asian-American engagement staffers. The RNC has also hired staff dedicated to engaging better with women, youth, people of faith and conservative allies and groups. We have hundreds of staff fanned out, especially in critical midterm states, supporting our candidates and growing our party. Today, 91% of our political staff is in the field.

They support whole teams of precinct captains. We've recruited more than 12,000 captains nationwide. Those captains have teams of volunteers whose job it is to maintain lasting relationships with sets of people in their communities. They're listening to their concerns and making sure they hear about the issues they care about.

Reince announced that the convention will be either June 27 or July 18, shortening the time between the start of primary voting and the official selection of our nominee, compared to 2012. There's a couple reasons for that.

First, once the Republican candidate is officially nominated, he will have access to general election funds. He won't have to hold back enough primary funding (or, more likely, simply go without funding) to fill the gap between the time he accumulates enough primary votes to become the presumptive nominee, which is usually April or May, and the time he is officially nominated, usually August or September.

Second, the early convention gives more time before Election Day for the Republican candidate to focus on the general election campaign, which involves pushing wedge issues for Democrats to the fore. This is in contrast to the primary, which necessarily involves Republicans pushing wedge issues for Republicans. Having a late convention last time meant voters spent almost a year hearing Republicans tear each other down and only 60 days on the general election campaign. We won't do that again.

Reince also mentioned the new digital and data tools the RNC is providing. They were helpful for Rep. Jolly in his recent special election in Florida and the idea is that they'll be available for all Republican candidates and state committees this year.

When the RNC announced the new tech startup, the Democrats rushed out to claim that they too were building a digital and data platform, called Project Ivy. But it's much ado about nothing, built on top of the OFA platform designed to turn out Obama voters, which has drastically underperformed whenever Obama isn't on the ballot.

Additionally, the Democrats have only a fraction of the cash on hand that Republicans do and enormous amounts of debt. The RNC remains debt-free, and therefore has the funds and flexibility to field its data tools. That too is part of Reince's plan.

[RSS]

[On iTunes]

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:48 AM | Comments (326)
Post contains 518 words, total size 4 kb.

This doesn't seem to lead to a definite answer.

Why isn't it as compelling as it seems? Because most of these landing strips seem to be unlikely endpoints.

The Berita Harian Malay language paper quoted unnamed sources close to the investigation as saying that the airport runways were Male International Airport in the Maldives, Diego Garcia and three runways in India and Sri Lanka.

I assume terrorists would not land at an international airport. Nor at Diego Garcia, where quite a few American servicemen might offer them a welcome warm as gunfire. There are of course terrorist groups operating in India but the country is held by an anti-terrorist government and, if I were trying to not be detected, I'd stay away from India altogether.

There are terrorist groups in Sri Lanka, of course, but I don't know anything else about Sri Lanka.

This is more interesting:

The unconfirmed report then goes on to say that all runways programmed into the simulator are 1000 meters long.

Why is that interesting?

Because a Boeing 777-300 has a listed minimum runway length of somewhere between 1,300 and 1,750 meters, depending on other conditions (such as landing weight, elevation of the airport, whether the runway is wet or dry). You'll want 1,500 meters at a minimum for wet runways, and you always have to consider the possibility of rain. (See correction below.)

So he's practicing emergency-style landings on a runway below the minimum runway length for the 777-300 located around the Indian Ocean. (See correction.)

Maybe this was prudence; maybe it was planning.

Note that other sources on the internet claim the minimum runway for a 777-300 is even longer than what that document says; some recommend 8,000 feet of runway. (See correction.)

Via Hot Air, Malaysian investigators are trying to recover recently-deleted files on the pilot's home flight simulator. (Note that it's possible the chronology here is muddled and the headline information -- about the five Indian Ocean runways -- is the result of these efforts.)

There's also a very simple explanation offered to explain all of this: There was a fire on the plane, the fire was electrical in nature, and the fire knocked out the transponder and ACARS. The pilots therefore turned west, towards the nearest possible runway for an emergency landing.

At some point, per this theory, they lost control of the plane and crashed.

If NBC's reporting that the new westerly waypoint was entered before the "All right, good night" signoff, that would seem to disprove this theory, as the pilots wouldn't divert for an emergency landing and then just say a polite goodnight as if nothing at all was wrong.

Of course, NBC's reporting could be wrong. There has been so many false reports, we don't know anything.

Correction: Andy says:

- The plane's a 777-200, not a 777-300

- Wikipedia says the runway at Diego Garcia is 3,659 meters long, which makes sense because we used to (and maybe still do) base B-52s there and those bad boys need a hell of a lot more than 1,000 meters.

I screwed up badly on the plane's type. A 777-200 does not require as long a runway for a landing -- but still over 1000 meters under best conditions (lowest weight, sea level airport, dry runway). It looks like you'd need a runway from around 1,150 meters to 1,700 meters, depending on conditions.

As for the runway at Diego Garcia: I'm asking Andy right now if Diego Garcia has only one runway. He confirms: It's just the one. So the news report I linked is flat-out wrong in at least one respect.

Sigh. Everything reported in this story is always wrong. Apologies for adding to the wrong reporting.

[Update - Andy:] The plane's a 777-200ER, to be precise. And there's one 3,659m runway at Diego Garcia.

Posted by: Ace at 06:50 AM | Comments (496)
Post contains 686 words, total size 5 kb.

The Lifeboat Mutiny

When I was around 10 or 11 I inherited a book of science fiction short stories by Robert Sheckley from my youngest uncle when he was clearing out his garage. When I got home my father happened to see it and remarked that it was a good book and that his favorite story was 'The Lifeboat Mutiny'.

Now I was a bit surprised by his casual familiarity with the book since I had no idea that my father had even heard of the author much less read anything by him. Of course it was only later I found out that it had been his book originally before my uncle had gotten it from him - and that my father was as much of a voracious reader as I was to become.

Anyway here is the intro to the story. You can read the rest here - it's not long.

"Tell me the truth. Did you ever see sweeter engines?" Joe, the Interstellar Junkman asked. "And look at those servos!"

"Hmm," Gregor said judiciously.

"That hull," Joe said softly. "I bet it's five hundred years old, and not a spot of corrosion on it." He patted the burnished side of the boat affectionately. What luck, the pat seemed to say, that this paragon among vessels should be here just when AAA Ace needs a lifeboat.

"She certainly does seem rather nice," Arnold said, with the studied air of a man who has fallen in love and is trying hard not to show it. "What do you think, Dick?"

Richard Gregor didn't answer. The boat was handsome, and she looked perfect for ocean survey work on Trident. But you had to be careful about Joe's merchandise.

"They just don't build 'em this way any more," Joe sighed. "Look at the propulsion unit. Couldn't dent it with a trip-hammer. Note the capacity of the cooling system. Examine-"

"It looks good," Gregor said slowly. The AAA Ace Interplanetary Decontamination Service had dealt with Joe in the past, and had learned caution. Not that Joe was dishonest; far from it. The flotsam he collected from anywhere in the inhabited Universe worked. But the ancient machines often had their own ideas of how a job should be done. They tended to grow peevish when forced into another routine.

"I don't care if it's beautiful, fast, durable, or even comfortable," Gregor said defiantly. "I just want to be absolutely sure it's safe."

Joe nodded. "That's the important thing, of course. Step inside."

They entered the cabin of the boat. Joe stepped up to the instrument panel, smiled mysteriously, and pressed a button.

Immediately Gregor heard a voice which seemed to originate in his head, saying, "I am Lifeboat 324-A. My purpose-"

"Telepathy?" Gregor interrupted.

"Direct sense recording," Joe said, smiling proudly. "No language barriers that way. I told you, they just don't build 'em this way any more."

"I am Lifeboat 324-A," the boat esped again. "My primary purpose is to preserve those within me from peril, and to maintain them in good health. At present, I am only partially activated."

"Could anything be safer?" Joe cried. "This is no senseless hunk of metal. This boat will look after you. This boat cares!"

Gregor was impressed, even though the idea of an emotional boat was somehow distasteful. But then, paternalistic gadgets had always irritated him.

Arnold had no such feelings. "We'll take it!"

"You won't be sorry," Joe said, in the frank and open tones that had helped make him a millionaire several times over.

Gregor hoped not.

The next day, Lifeboat 324-A was loaded aboard their spaceship and they blasted off for Trident.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:13 PM | Comments (772)
Post contains 2212 words, total size 20 kb.

That's what NBCNew says. I think it's possible they're overerading this a little, but I'll get to that.

The missing Malaysia Airlines jet's abrupt U-turn was programmed into the on-board computer well before the co-pilot calmly signed off with air traffic controllers, sources tell NBC News.

The change in direction was made at least 12 minutes before co-pilot Fariq Abdul Hamid said "All right, good night," to controllers on the ground, the sources said.

Here's why I think they're overreading this a little. First, the timeline:

1:07 am: Last ACARS transmission

1:19 am: "All right, good night" signoff

1:37 am: Scheduled ACARS transmission that never came, because ACARS had been disabled

My problem is that they are saying the turn began at 1:07am. We've seen mistakes made before with timing, based on ACARS -- the Malaysians claimed that ACARS was turned off before the signoff, when they really meant it was turned off sometime after 1:07am. "After 1:07am" quickly became at 1:07 am.

I am guessing that the ACARS transmission itself contained the flightpath changed. And that would have come in at 1:07 am, right? 12 minutes before the 1:19 am signoff.

But just because the flightpath change is programmed into ACARS doesn't necessarily mean the jet began to execute the turn yet.

Megyn Kelly was trying to get people to be firm on this point on her show, and people seemed to be saying "probably" or "maybe" as to whether they knew the plane was already turning at 1:19 am, as opposed to programmed to turn.

Whether the jet had already begun to turn or not, it does seem very important that the instruction was already keyed into the Flight Management System before the copilot's signoff.

Posted by: Ace at 05:34 PM | Comments (212)
Post contains 319 words, total size 2 kb.

The battle over climate change is a David vs. Goliath fight according to Marc Morano, Director of Communications at CFACT, Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow and editor of their website Climate Depot.

But who is who in this pitched battle? It's not who you think if you just listened to the media.

“One fossil fuel donation [by a natural gas company] to the major environmental group, the Sierra Club, exceeded all the donations to probably of all the top global warming skeptic organizations you can ever name, in one donation. That’s how well funded the environmental left is.”

In addition to that we talk about what it's like to do battle with people who continually move the goal posts while insisting that the "science is settled", how "climate change" became the explanation to everything and the ways some Republicans have helped advance Al Gore's pet cause.

Listen: [Stream with Stitcher] [Download]

Subscribe: [ RSS] [iTunes]

Questions?: [Ask The Blog]

For more on all of this follow Marc on Twitter.

Posted by: DrewM at 02:27 PM | Comments (178)
Post contains 176 words, total size 2 kb.

At the last minute, I decided to follow a real White Whale of a race: the gubernatorial contest in the Land of Lincoln.

Incumbent Democrat Governor Pat Quinn is vulnerable, but he was vulnerable four years ago: there's always Chicago to contend with. Still, if the Rs end up with a clear winner and stock up on zombie-fighting supplies, they might yet win this mansion back.

Results for Republican Primaries, Gubernatorial and Senate (it would be nice if a different sacrificial lamb faces Durbin this year), below. more...

Posted by: CAC at 03:53 PM | Comments (286)
Post contains 152 words, total size 4 kb.

Before the cute stuff, here's some news. Oklahoma is suing Obama and the EPA for what seems to be some kind of scam going on to deem federal lands off-limits to energy producers.

Here's what's going on: An environmental lobbying group sues the government, claiming that this or that energy project would endanger a protected species. The government quickly settles, agreeing to put those lands off-limits for production.

Here's what Oklahoma seems to be hinting at: It's a fix. The Administration is settling because it wants to put these lands off-limits, and lacks the Congressional authority to do so. So they concede a case they could easily win and get a piece of paper, the settlement now part of the law (a contract the US has entered into to settle a lawsuit), that says the lands are off-limits.

But this is more than just another green lawsuit. If Oklahoma and DEPA lose their suit, it could have a devastating impact on the U.S. energy boom, halting exploration and drilling on huge tracts of energy-rich land.

In their suit, Oklahoma and the DEPA seek "declaratory and injunctive relief for violations of the ESA." The relief is intended to overturn designation of dozens of species added to the threatened or endangered list through the "sue and settle" process.

...

Under the Obama administration, the feds have entered into a consent agreement with the environmentalists to rush forward a judgment on an unprecedented number of species. A 2012 Chamber of Commerce study found record numbers of such "sue and settle" cases under Obama.

The issue has taken on new urgency. Under a March 31 sue-and-settle deadline, Fish and Wildlife is expected to rule that a handful of additional species are endangered — including the lesser prairie chicken.

Mickey Kaus writes that Democrats are having trouble overturning an Affirmative Action-limiting constitutional amendment in California, because Asians (largely Democratic) don't like being discriminated against based on their race.

France says it might cancel that deal to deliver two advanced helicopter-carrying assault ships to Russia. Of course, this being France, they have to be dicks about it.

"If Putin continues doing what he is doing we could envisage cancelling the sales," Fabius told TF1 television on Tuesday. "This would be part of a third level of sanctions. For the moment we are at the second level.

"But we will ask others, and I'm thinking namely the British, to do the same with the assets of the Russian oligarchs in London. Sanctions have to be shouldered by everyone."

Apparently there are a fair number of Russian billionaires who either live in London, or live there part time, or who have a lot of money held in London. Russian dissident and chess grandmaster Gary Kasparov has called for hitting these men financially, in hopes that they would in turn pressure Putin to behave.

Thanks to their unfettered access to Western markets, Mr. Putin and his gang have exploited Western engagement with Russia in a way that the Soviet Union's leaders never dreamed of. But this also means that they are vulnerable in a way the Soviets were not. If the West punishes Russia with sanctions and a trade war, that might be effective eventually, but it would also be cruel to the 140 million Russians who live under Mr. Putin's rule. And it would be unnecessary. Instead, sanction the 140 oligarchs who would dump Mr. Putin in the trash tomorrow if he cannot protect their assets abroad. Target their visas, their mansions and IPOs in London, their yachts and Swiss bank accounts. Use banks, not tanks.

Eh, that sounds good to me too. So maybe the French aren't off-base.

Instapundit links an article about how women cooperate with each other-- not quite as well as advertised.

“The question we wanted to examine was: Do men or women cooperate differently with members of their own sex?” Wrangham said. “The conventional wisdom is that women cooperate more easily, but when you look at how armies or sports teams function, there is evidence that men are better at cooperating in some ways.”

...

“There is even evidence that these differences exist in 6-month-olds — but you can see it with the naked eye by about 5 or 6 years old, where boys form these large, loose groups, and girls tend to pair off into more intense, close friendships.”

What makes the differences particularly provocative, Benenson said, is that chimpanzees organize their relationships in nearly identical ways.

“Chimpanzee males usually have another individual they’re very close with, and they may constantly battle for dominance, but they also have a larger, loose group of allies,” Benenson said. “When it comes to defeating other groups, everybody bands together. I would argue that females don’t have that biological inclination, and they don’t have the practice.”

Apparently women cooperate well when they both have the same official rank (e.g., both are tenured professors, or both are senior research directors). When they don't share the same hierarchal rank, they're not as good at cooperation.

I imagine this is at least partly due to how boys are socialized, which is largely around team sports. There's less of an idea of an "official rank." The guy who plays the best gets, unofficially, the top rank, gets invited to be team captain, but that comes from performance.

@doreenhdixon and Neidermeyer's Bossy Horse send this: the world's largest James Bond car collection is now on sale for an asking price of... $33 million.

Dude, you could buy an Aston Martin DB5 and literally add the ejector seat, armor plating, and machine guns for $33 million. Why buy a prop when you can build out the actual car, if you want?

Oh, and if you were thinking, "Hey, I'll just FOIA the White House to get documents proving they're engaged in unilateral assertions of power for political purposes:" You lose, my friend. Because they've already thought of that, and have unilaterally rewritten the FOIA law to protect politically sensitive documents.

It's Sunshine Week, so perhaps some enterprising White House reporter will ask press secretary Jay Carney why President Obama rewrote the Freedom of Information Act without telling the rest of America.

The rewrite came in an April 15, 2009, memo from then-White House Counsel Greg Craig instructing the executive branch to let White House officials review any documents sought by FOIA requestors that involved "White House equities."

That phrase is nowhere to be found in the FOIA, yet the Obama White House effectively amended the law to create a new exception to justify keeping public documents locked away from the public.

If you remember, when the White House and State were cooking their Benghazi story, the State Department insisted that any reference to prior signals about terrorism should be deleted, in order to "protect the equities" of the State Department.

Thanks to @laurww for that. That seems big. If I hadn't already done this open thread, I'd make it a main post.

Okay, and now the cute stuff. Cats and squirrels. Much cuter than maybe you were expecting.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 03:19 PM | Comments (215)
Post contains 1188 words, total size 8 kb.

All things bracket, since @MikeTalley73 aka Wunderkraut was kind enough to set it up. If you're feeling it, go here and have at it.

If you're like me and not really feeling it, that's ok. You can sit over here and get drunk with the rest of us grumps.

(but seriously Mike thanks).

Name: Ace of Spades
ID: 168245
Password: scandi

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 02:00 PM | Comments (187)
Post contains 65 words, total size 1 kb.