Feast your eyes on all this Southern-ness.

When they're not busy making up false claims of Republican "dog whistles," they're eagerly crafting their own.

Update: Per a commenter at Jonah Goldberg's original post, NPR has now edited this clip so that they say "Democrats" instead of "Southern Democrats.

Posted by: Ace at 07:14 AM | Comments (280)
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.

Happy Thursday.

Crimean lawmakers plan to hold a referendum on joining Russia.

Rep. Ryan gave BuzzFeed's McKay Coppins a sneak-peek at his CPAC speech.

Also, at CPAC, Gov. Christie will try to recover his front-runner status. According to a new poll, he's got some work to do.

More from WaPo's latest poll, with some really nifty crosstabs (click "detailed view" on the ones that interest you).

WSJ's Patrick O'Connor has a piece on CPAC speeches as a spring-board to 2016.

I can't seem to find it if ACU is planning to livestream CPAC this year like it did last, but CSPAN will have Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin's speeches around 12:40pm. (Nothing says "future of the conservatism" like Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin.)

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:53 AM | Comments (324)
Post contains 131 words, total size 2 kb.

• In The Race For The Senate, The GOP Is In The Driver's Seat
  
• Obama In Denial
  
• Hillary Walks Back Hitler-Putin Comparison
  
• The Anti-Empirical Left
  
• Reject Naive Foreign Policy Whatever The Source
  
• The Democrats Crusade Against "Un-American" Activities
  
• The Other Right To Privacy
  
• Ukraine And The Clash Of Civilizations
  
• Seven Energy Policies To Make Russia Pay
  
• RT Anchor Resigns
  
• Russia Is Doomed
  
• We're In The Best Of Hands
  
• Wendy Davis Will Cause The Dems To Divert Resources To Georgia
  
• DNC Attendees Can't Name A Single Hillary Accomplishment
  
• Chipotle Walking Back Global Warming Guacamole Scare Mongering
  

Follow me on twitter.

Posted by: Open Blogger at 05:00 AM | Comments (418)
Post contains 106 words, total size 2 kb.

Ralph Peters on Obama: "He Does Not Believe in This Country"

Devastating because it's true.

The problem with being a post-national president of your country is that you end up always losing out to actual leaders who do believe in their nations.

Look, the bottom line on this is Russia has a real leader. You may not like him, and I don't, but he is brilliant and ruthless, he has clear goals and he moves straight toward those goals. The West lacks a leader. Like it or not, the president of the United States is the de facto leader of the West, and our president just is - he's incapable and unwilling to lead.

The weakness is phenomenal. Now, you know, we are not weaker than we were in the Carter years. I was in that military, it was pathetic. Our military today is the best in the world, best in our history, although Obama wants to dismantle it. We're also immensely wealthier than the Carter years. The problem is, that as a president Obama is far weaker than Carter, and he's probably the worst president we've ever had.

He is a man who's incapable of making a hard decision. And by the way, one other key point, Vladimir Putin believes in Russia. He believes in Russia's destiny, its mission. Obama does not believe in American exceptionalism. He does not believe in this country.

The Obama Way: If He Believes It, It Must Be So

When it comes to Iran, Obama shows an attitude that can only be described as solipsistic: what's in his mind is reality. And any other reality is just plain silly.

...It's pretty obvious to all analysts that Iran does not fear an American military strike much these days, especially after Mr. Obama's failure to act in Syria last summer. But Obama denies it, referring to himself in the third person as someone "who has shown himself willing to take military action." Drones, sure; a quick raid as well. But in Libya and Syria, he showed himself extremely reluctant to take military action. Remember "leading from behind?" If he genuinely thinks he is viewed as a scary guy with his finger near the trigger, we all have a problem.

...This is the Obama who said of his own nomination that "this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal." If he believes it, it must be so. The Goldberg interview reveals that five years in, nothing has changed.

Sowell on Reality vs the Intelligentsia

The front page of a local newspaper in northern California featured the headline "The Promise Denied," lamenting the under-representation of women in computer engineering. The continuation of this long article on an inside page had the headline, "Who is to blame for this?"

In other words, the fact that reality does not match the preconceptions of the intelligentsia shows that there is something wrong with reality, for which somebody must be blamed. Apparently their preconceptions cannot be wrong.

Quote of the Day

We want the world to solve its own problems for a while. The problem is that all this - invasions, wholesale slaughter, ethnic cleansing, missile tests, naval provocations, and raw brutality - is how the world beyond our borders solves its own problems.

"Let the world solve its own problems for a while!" Oh, it does, my friends. It does. http://t.co/u95PutVyTM pic.twitter.com/7jgwhmT4Ok

- Jim Geraghty (@jimgeraghty) March 5, 2014

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:07 PM | Comments (925)
Post contains 988 words, total size 10 kb.

And if you think he's not going to figure out that, hey, October 2016 is just before an important election and then delay it until May 2017, then let Rob Halford disabuse you of that mistaken belief.

Now, not only is Obama saying that these legacy plans can remain, but heÂ’s saying they can stay alive for three years longer than intended. If they can be extended for three years, the new rules may never fully go into effect (unless Obama will allow a wave of cancellations in October 2016, just before the presidential election). And maintaining these plans will further drive up the cost of insurance on the exchanges.

Remember, Obama deliberately canceled these policies in order to force them to subsidize sicker people in the exchanges. To the extent these people aren't in the exchanges, the cost for insurance on the exchanges goes up -- or, of course, Obama pays off the insurance companies through the "risk corridor" mechanism to induce insurers to set their prices artificially low.

Allah concludes:

Quite simply, Obama was forced to choose between doing something that would help his party at the ballot box but hurt his signature health-care law and doing something that would help stabilize the law financially at the risk of generating a nasty backlash to his party from consumers with cancellations. He made the political choice. Which is exactly what OÂ’s critics feared would happen as government insinuated itself further into the health-care industry via O-Care. Decisions on health-care policy are now a species of politics. YouÂ’re welcome, America.

P-Shop by @slublog

Okay, I'm under the weather and never quite woke up today. I'm doing the podcast soon. So, Open Thread.

Sorry I suck so bad this week.

Posted by: Ace at 02:58 PM | Comments (589)
Post contains 313 words, total size 2 kb.

Of course, this is Tom Friedman's great answer to everything.

How do we revitalize the American economy? Raise the gas tax, impose a carbon-tax scheme.

How do we renew America's sense of patriotism? Raise the gas tax, impose a carbon-tax scheme.

How do we lower gas and energy prices? Raise the gas tax, impose a carbon-tax scheme.

So no one should be surprised that the key to driving Putin out of the Ukraine with his tail tucked between his legs is to raise the gas tax, impose a carbon-tax scheme. (Link to NRO.)

I’d also raise our gasoline tax, put in place a carbon tax and a national renewable energy portfolio standard — all of which would also help lower the global oil price (and make us stronger, with cleaner air, less oil dependence and more innovation). You want to frighten Putin? Just announce those steps.

Gasbaggery.

I apologize for the light/superficial blogging this week. I'm just not feelin' it.

Posted by: Ace at 02:17 PM | Comments (246)
Post contains 188 words, total size 1 kb.

His show's edgy format blends the two hottest trends in youth-oriented programming -- stammering and Making No Sense.

Big fan.

BTW: All the mu.nu sites are under a massive spam attack. Posting and commenting are in and out, depending on the minute.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 12:48 PM | Comments (316)
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.

From @drewmtips, via Missilito, this report in French from Le Point.

During the crisis, business continues. The First of two big warships bought in 2011 by Russia from France, the helicopter-carrier Vladisvostok is ready for action. If all goes as planned, a demonstration symbolic but powerful of the military solidarity between Paris and Moscow will be given Wednesday, March 5, at 6:30 pm, when the brand-new helicopter carrier will leave the Joubert drydock at the port of Saint-Nazaire to speed straight out into the open sea...

The Vladivostok is due for an October 2014 delivery (France is testing it today), and the second ship, identical to the first, is due for delivery in 2015.

The second ship is named the Sevastopol -- after the Crimean port so beloved by Putin.

The article concludes:

Our request for information about the official position of Paris on the status of these two ships have not been answered. The minister of foreign affairs, Laurent Fabius has said, at the beginning of the week, concerning a change in military cooperation between France and Russia: "We are not there yet." At the ministry of defense, it is said that the situation is "under study." But Moscow is giving some reasons for the French to think deeply about this, particularly the current order for construction of two more ships of the same type. At 600 million Euros per ship, this causes some serious consideration! For the moment, Paris says nothing. What is the saying...? Oh yes: The customer is always right.

The Vladivostok (I think)

I think it's pretty awesome that the French are showing off their military solidarity with Putin.

Posted by: Ace at 11:25 AM | Comments (177)
Post contains 298 words, total size 2 kb.

A party of cowards.

Six of the key seven there make sense: Casey, Donnelly, Heitkamp, Manchin, Pryor, and Walsh are all either red- or purple-staters and therefore leery of cuddling up to a guy whoÂ’s known for having defended Mumia Abu-Jamal. Coons is the outlier. HeÂ’s from deep-blue Delaware and doesnÂ’t face reelection for another two years....

Another surprise is some of the red-state Democrats who did vote yes, including/especially red-staters who are up in November. What on earth were Mary Landrieu and Kay Hagan, whoÂ’s rocking a 33 percent approval rating these days in North Carolina, thinking?

There is a mystery here, as Allah explains. One Democrat apparently flipped from "yes" to "no" at the last minute. Joey Bidez was standing by to cast a tie-breaking 51st vote to put this nominee over the top-- but a Democrat decided to duck and vote "no" to avoid the spectacle of that.

Posted by: Ace at 10:20 AM | Comments (362)
Post contains 185 words, total size 1 kb.

Hmmm. He reaffirms the church's opposition to gay marriage, but says the church could, maybe, support some types of civil unions.

So what I'm trying to say is that he's an incorrigible, relentlessly hateful bigot who supports Jim Crow for gayz. Anyone who supports Barack Obama's 2007-2011 publicly announced position from 2012 onwards is just a H8r.

Timing is everything.

The Pope reiterated the church's longstanding teaching that "marriage is between a man and a woman." However, he said, "We have to look at different cases and evaluate them in their variety."

For instance, civil unions provide financial security to cohabitating couples, "as for instance in medical care," the Pope said in a wide-ranging interview published Wednesday in Corriere della Sera, an Italian daily.

A number of Catholic bishops have supported civil unions for same-sex couples, including Pope Francis when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires in 2010, according to reports in National Catholic Reporter and The New York Times.

But Wednesday's comments are "the first time a Pope has indicated even tentative acceptance of civil unions," according to Catholic News Service.

...

"The situation in which we live now provides us with new challenges which sometimes are difficult for us to understand," the Pope told leaders of religious orders, adding that the church "must be careful not to administer a vaccine against faith to them."

That last statement seems important, signaling, as it seems to, that Francis' prioritization is bringing the Word to everyone, and avoiding positions which would "vaccinate" people against hearing it.

Posted by: Ace at 08:45 AM | Comments (581)
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.