The highest since 2003.

And what is the big news in the MSM?

The looming recession, of course.

U.S. may dodge recession, but slow growth to hit hard
Wed Nov 28, 2007 1:49pm EST

By Joanne Morrison - Analysis

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The economy may dodge the bullet of a recession in the year ahead but it's almost certain that there will be months of slow growth that will create hardship for many businesses and consumers.

Economists expect troubles in the housing and financial sectors to deepen, and many have cut already low forecasts for U.S. economic growth as stress in credit markets began to build anew in recent weeks.

While housing accounts for a relatively small percentage of the economy, it has a disproportionate effect on consumer behavior because of the "wealth effect." People spend more based on their perception of the value of their homes.

With real estate prices falling and credit tight, a growing chorus of economists think the world's largest economy is about to topple into recession, and even those who don't see a full-blown downturn warn of rising unemployment and potential pay cuts as businesses seek to tighten their belts.

"A recession is more likely than not at this point," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com. "It's still very possible that we can avoid a recession, but it's going to be impossible to avoid what we view as a very weak economy through next spring -- and that will be very painful."

I think it's proper to speculate about a potential future recession. They always have come before and will continue doing so. The only question is when.

But the media wishes to discuss past recessions and future recessions exclusively. It is unwilling to acknowledge that we are presently in a period of strong growth. The only time current strong growth is ever given a mention at all is in the media's constant these-good-times-shall-soon-end stories. And I wouldn't mind such stories, either, if in any other story they admitted we are in fact currently in good economic times.

But they won't admit that. The only two stories they'll report are 1) Times Are Tough followed by 2) And They're About To Get Tougher Still.

Posted by: Ace at 08:59 AM | Comments (9)
Post contains 391 words, total size 3 kb.

Numbers don't lie.

November 2003: 82.
November 2004: 137.
November 2005: 84.
November 2006: 70.
November 2007: 34.

Via Instapundit, thanks to dri.

Posted by: Ace at 08:33 AM | Comments (2)
Post contains 53 words, total size 1 kb.

Cause unknown at this time, 2 employees killed.

The timing is pretty bad. We are coming to the strongest demand period for crude with the approach of the northern winter," said Mark Pervan of ANZ.

The Enfield lines supplied 1.5 million bpd in the 3rd quarter of this year. Some capacity has been restored but officials did not say how much. Even if other oil producing nations increase supply, there aren't a lot of ways to get that crude to landlocked Midwestern refineries. There is some unused capacity on other lines.

The article also notes that Canada is the largest supplier of foreign crude oil to the US, and most of it is delivered through this system.

OOPS UPDATE: I got the name wrong, it's Enbridge. Two of the four lines are operating, a third is being inspected. The one where the fire occured had been shut down for maintenance, so hopefully minimal impact. Early reports say the third line could be operational again in a few days.

Posted by: Dave In Texas at 06:09 AM | Comments (3)
Post contains 190 words, total size 1 kb.

No major serious posts from me tonight. I'm a little drained because of the debate. Just a few short items of interest:

(1) As far as post-debate discussion goes, I disagree with those that are complaining about CNN's choice of questions. With the exception of the space-program question, which was a complete waste of time, the video-questions did a good job showing how these candidates differ from the Democrats and each other. They hit every single issue of contention right now and also managed to cover an impressive number of smaller issues that will only matter to select groups.

I think the folks crying foul over the Stars and Bars questions are putting their disappointment and anger at how the candidates responded onto CNN for daring to intimate that Republicans and especially Southerners feel differently about the flag than do most Democrats. How oversensitive are the folks over at the Corner that they don't even want CNN to mention it, as if the differences don't exist or that this is not an important issue for a great many people.

The same goes for the gun questions. We've been talking about how important the Second Amendment issue is for months, especially with regard to Giuliani. But now the Corner is complaining that CNN actually asked the candidates about it? This is standard, plain-vanilla griping about the "MSM." That's getting old.

It's tired, it's unimpressive, and it is unhelpful because it completely obscures the real story: our candidates did great tonight. I found myself very impressed, even with several candidates I have strongly disliked for years. I even found myself nodding along with John McCain a few times, and actually clapped for Mitt Romney once.

As far as the creepy-guy Bible question, it wasn't a substantively important question for me, and I suspect it wasn't for too many others. On the other hand, it would be completely unreasonable to outlaw questions about the literalness of the Bible, especially given the national discussion of creationism in schools.

Finally, the complaint at the Corner that there were not enough substantive questions about national security seems to me to be begging for exactly the kind of canned answers everyone hates. We already know what they're going to say about national security. Giuliani is going to talk about NYC. McCain is going to talk about his time as a senator, if he doesn't manage to work in a mention of Vietnam. Romney is going to make powerful and sweeping statements about engagement and democracy. And Paul is going to talk about running home and cowering behind the walls of Fortress America. If you want that stuff, go watch a campaign ad or two.

Wow, that got longer than I thought.

(2) There is an amusing contest going on over at Worth1000.com in which folks are photoshopping celebrities into Star Wars roles. Some of them are very good (although there are few of the done-to-death Pope Benedict as Emperor). I like this one (from a previous contest):

(3) Average Gay Joe notes that the Virginia GOP has instituted what he's calling "loyalty oaths." Go over to his place for a roundup on the issue.

(4) Eddiebear sent me this story earlier today, about how Tennessee is seeking to get more jurors:

A provision allowing an exemption for alcoholics or anyone who “is drunk, or has been drunk during the term of the court then sitting” also is up for elimination.

(5) Finally and on a more personal note, I thought I'd mention to the morons that I got an offer this afternoon for the job I interviewed for back in October. Your advice about getting around Falls Church was excellent. They want me for the offices in L.A., so I'll be staying right here when I graduate in May. Thanks again.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 12:17 AM | Comments (12)
Post contains 652 words, total size 4 kb.

I think this quote from the Corner is exactly right.

I was absolutely disgusted with what I saw tonight from CNN. Thousands of people submitted questions for this debate; yet, the questions they chose only served to reinforce the stereotype that the average Republican voter is a confederate-flag-waving, gun-toting, bible-brandishing conspiracy theorist! There were staggeringly few questions on National Security, and the few that were asked include some of the substanceless "gotcha" questions which were designed for no other purpose than to induce gaffes. What bothers me most is that CNN's embarassing performance was not out of malice; they genuinely believe that this is what Republicans are like and that these ridiculous questions are what Republican voters want to hear. A bad night for CNN and for the American media generally.

Emph added.

So, I started thinking about this and I was reminded of something similar from my days in the Senate.

The late Senator Paul Coverdell introduced a bill in 1997 called the "Volunteer Protection Act." The goal of this legislation (which was signed into law) was to exempt volunteers (like little league baseball coaches) from negligence lawsuits brought against them by ambulance chasing trial lawyers.

Vermont's continuing embarrassment, Senator Patrick Leahy, took to the Senate floor to speak against this bill. He used a prop...a poster of a Confederate Flag. He said that the bill would provide legal immunity to members of the Klu Klux Klan. He was wrong. It was, purely and simply, an attempt to tar a bill opposed by the trial lawyers under the auspices of perhaps the worst slander one can commit in America today: ill-founded accusations of racism.
more...

Posted by: Jack M. at 10:04 PM | Comments (19)
Post contains 1219 words, total size 7 kb.

CJ sends me a lot of emails sluglined "Journalism." Seems like a reasonable description -- must read. It involves Helen Thomas, anti-American animus, and gross incompetency.

Posted by: Ace at 07:44 PM | Comments (5)
Post contains 28 words, total size 1 kb.

Tonight’s CNN debate had a ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’ question from a retired general. Apparently the general, Keith Kerr, is a member of the LGBT Americans For Hillary Steering Committee.

Kerr was in the audience and after Romney, Hunter and Huckabee responded, Kerr was asked if he felt they answered his question. Kerr took that opportunity to make a two or three minute speech in favor of gays serving openly in the military and taking the Republicans to task for not supporting that.

You have to hand it to them...the Hillary people are really good at planting questions. At least CNN didn't identify him as an undecided voter.

H/t The Corner

UPDATE:

Commenter TheEJS points out that Kerr was part of Veterans for Kerry as well.

UPDATE x2:
Cooper said CNN didn't know about Kerr's affiliation with the Clinton campaign and had they known they would have acknowledged it, if they had used his question at all.

Posted by: DrewM. at 07:25 PM | Comments (37)
Post contains 172 words, total size 1 kb.

Tonight’s CNN debate had a ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’ question from a retired general. Apparently the general, Keith Kerr, is a member of the LGBT Americans For Hillary Steering Committee.

Kerr was in the audience and after Romney, Hunter and Huckabee responded, Kerr was asked if he felt they answered his question. Kerr took that opportunity to make a two or three minute speech in favor of gays serving openly in the military and taking the Republicans to task for not supporting that.

You have to hand it to them...the Hillary people are really good at planting questions. At least CNN didn't identify him as an undecided voter.

H/t The Corner

UPDATE:

Commenter TheEJS points out that Kerr was part of Veterans for Kerry as well.

UPDATE x2:
Cooper said CNN didn't know about Kerr's affiliation with the Clinton campaign and had they known they would have acknowledged it, if they had used his question at all.

Posted by: DrewM at 07:25 PM | Comments (45)
Post contains 187 words, total size 1 kb.

At 8:00pm.

For once it should be interesting, as there's real movement in the polls and everyone should be gunning for Huckabee.

Update: Some Snowman before the debate. more...

Posted by: Ace at 04:01 PM | Comments (405)
Post contains 62 words, total size 1 kb.

First they came for the 9 year old school children and then for the morons on blogsÂ…

“As we said to (the boy) when he was in here, in your heart you may have that feeling, and that is OK if that is your personal belief,” Abraham Lincoln Traditional School Principal Virginia Voinovich said in a tape-recorded parent-teacher conference.

The boy was suspended for three days this month for allegedly committing a “hate crime” by using the expression “brown people.”

IÂ’d blame Tushar D. but I donÂ’t want to get arrested.

On a more troubling note, it appears that the enforcement of the schoolÂ’s thought code has been farmed out to former KGB Agents.

But the tape recording indicates this only came out after another parent was allowed to question the boy and elicited from him the statement that he “doesn't cooperate with brown people.”

After that was reported to the boy's teacher, he was made to stand in front of his class and publicly confess what he'd said.

The boy maintains that he never said it; that the words were put in his mouth by the parent who questioned him. That parent happens to be the mother of the student with whom he is having a conflict—and she happens to work for Abraham Lincoln as a detention-room officer.

The tape indicates that rather than just spouting off with racial invective, the boy was asked first why he didn't want to cooperate with brown people by the parent/school official.

In court, this might be called entrapment. Not to mention a conflict of interest.

Hi, could I point out one thing that seems to be lost here? The kid is NINE years old. HeÂ’s having problems with another student, a not exactly unheard of occurrence and they turn it into a Star Chamber?

I guess the school is so fantastic theyÂ’ve licked that whole reading, writing and arithmetic thing and moved onto college level political indoctrination.

Posted by: DrewM at 02:50 PM | Comments (31)
Post contains 349 words, total size 2 kb.