When I heard Christie was going to be on SNL, I had my own quickie idea for a sketch. Christie plays a salesman selling something silly -- let's say, he sells Crocs. He suggests a type of Crocs to a potential customer -- let's say Blue Plastic lined with Fur -- and the customer balks. At this point someone hands him a microphone and he begins giving a version of one of his YouTube dressing-downs -- playing to the audience of ten other people in the Crocs department -- explaining how our future demands we wear Blue Fur-Lined Crocs and further explaining that the reluctant customer is being taken in by other shoe salesmen who tell her a pack of pretty lies about footwear not having to be blue, plastic, or lined with fur.

After making the sale, he puts down the microphone, handing it off to a younger assistant Crocs salesman, then tries with the next customer, again being handed the microphone. And so on for three customers, with escalating barbs from Christie, maybe one person talks back and then he really gives it to them (suggesting the reluctant customer might be racist).

Anyway, instead, he makes a few jokes about how New Jerseyans are rude and impatient. Several weak jokes are just designed as flattery -- he's wearing the fleece so often, of course, because he's workin' so hard.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 07:18 AM | Comments (193)
Post contains 269 words, total size 2 kb.

Happy Monday.

It's important that we learn some lessons from this election, but it's more important that we don't learn the wrong lessons.

I am quoted in this LA Times op-ed, that proposes Sarah Palin as a "GOP cure." The post that's being quoted (without being linked; bad form, LA Times) is at the NYDN and that post was an extension of this one here at the HQ.

The column and both posts are worth a read or a re-read, if I do say so myself. All three are trying to get at why we lost so as to make reasonable predictions about how we can win next time. But the LA Times column proceeds from a false idea, one that I've seen repeated elsewhere on conservative sites, including our own.

One problem that we should shoot down immediately is claim by the LA Times writer that the GOP is in need of a cure. That's just not the case. We lost by between 300,000 to 400,000 votes in swing states. That's an amazingly close election. It does not represent a repudiation of Republican ideas at all. We lost an election, not an argument.

Another problem that we should be shooting down is the claim that Romney failed to turn out the GOP vote. It's a complete myth; turnout does not explain our loss and anyone trying to tell you that it did is simply trying to sell you something. Usually, they're trying to sell you on the idea that Romney wasn't conservative enough, which conveniently dovetails with their own political preferences. (But, note well, they'd have said Romney wasn't conservative enough even if he won.)

To answer the turnout question, let's look at the numbers. In 2008, 131.3 million people voted. Obama got 69.5 million votes; McCain got 59.9. In 2012, 123.2 million people voted, but the difference was almost entirely on the Democratic side of the ledger. This year, Obama got 6 million fewer votes than in 2008. Romney only lagged McCain by 0.274 million votes.

And how did Romney do if we just look at the swing states? Actually, in swing states Romney exceeded McCain by 256 thousand votes. He also outperformed Bush in 2004 in the 2012 swing states.

So the idea that there was some untapped pool of voters just itching to go GOP, if only we'd run a different candidate just isn't supported by the evidence. The failure here wasn't a failure of ideology, but one of strategy. Romney (and me, and virtually every conservative strategist and commentator) thought the election was about the economy. And for Republicans it was. But for swing voters, it was about whether they were comfortable siding with Republicans. Obama contested that with vapid, frivolous japes about binders, Big Bird, and blame Bush.

There is another lesson lurking here, but it's one that many folks don't want to hear. We did not lose this election because Obama promised voters handouts. Maybe that's how Obama thought to buy core Democratic turnout, but he still massively underperformed his numbers from 2008. And it's certainly not how he got the swing voters; they recognized a pander. Instead, he got the swing voters by making Romney the icky candidate. The same thing could have been done to any candidate we ran because it wasn't about Romney's politics, it was about a caricature of Republicans that we have repeatedly failed to rebut.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:56 AM | Comments (605)
Post contains 576 words, total size 4 kb.

This week's edition is sans a bacon recipe, as I was busy making beer pudding and finishing off my bacon whiskey from last week.

Today's B-Movie is New World Pictures' The Stuff. Fun fact: Arsenio Hall was actually supposed to star, but was turned down for being an unknown. Clearly the studio made the right pick with Garrett Morris, whose career was going to explode at any moment five years after leaving Saturday Night Live.

Today's bad movie: TerrorVision. Imagine the 1980s, BUZZFEEDified, but with even less lawl. Throw in Uncle Rico, a porn star serving up a homage Elvira's television talents, and Charles Band, and this is what you get. Try as it might, still not as good a film as Laserblast. (Bonus to anyone who gets that reference).

more...

Posted by: CAC at 08:09 PM | Comments (49)
Post contains 155 words, total size 1 kb.

WRM: Why Americans Support Israel

Short version: Because we're Jacksonians. And we don't see them doing anything differently than we would.

And if you haven't read Mead's seminal essay on the Jacksonian school of American foreign policy yet, remove your shame by going here right now. Coming out of the warring, honor culture of the Scots-Irish, this tradition more than anything else explains why America is not like other countries.

As Israeli airstrikes and naval shells bombarded Gaza this weekend, the world asked the question that perennially frustrates, confuses and enrages so many people across the planet: Why aren't the Americans hating on Israel more?...Commentators around the world grasp at straws in seeking to explain what's going on.

...America is a big country with a lot of things going on, but the real force driving American support for Israeli actions in Gaza isn't Islamophobia, Jewish conspiracies or foam-flecked religious nuts. It's something much simpler: many though not all Americans look at war through a distinctive cultural lens. Readers of Special Providence know that I've written about four schools of American thinking about world affairs; from the perspective of the most widespread of them, the Jacksonians, what Israel is doing in Gaza makes perfect sense. Not only are many Jacksonians completely untroubled by Israel's response to the rocket attacks in Gaza, many genuinely don't understand why the rest of the world is so steamed about Israel-and so angry with the United States.

Jacksonians aren't into the whole 'proportional' war thing. When you're in a fight - especially an existential one with an enemy without honor - all bets are off and annihilation of the enemy until they submit is the expected outcome.

...In any case, when Israel brings the big guns and fast planes against Gaza's popguns and low tech missiles, a great many Americans see nothing but common sense at work. These Americans aren't mad about 'disproportionate' Israeli violence in Gaza because they don't really accept the concept of proportionality in war. They think that if you have jus ad bellum, and rocket strikes from Gaza are definitely that, you get something close to a blank check when it comes to jus in bello.

...Far from seeing Israel's use of overwhelming force against limited provocation as harsh or immoral, many Americans see it as courageous and wise. It strengthens the sense that in a wacky world where a lot of foreigners are hard to understand, the Israelis are honest, competent and reliable friends - good people to have on your side in a tight spot.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:15 PM | Comments (644)
Post contains 1160 words, total size 12 kb.

I have to start drinking more.

Posted by: Ace at 02:51 PM | Comments (681)
Post contains 14 words, total size 1 kb.

Did I do that?

The White House yesterday denied it edited talking points about the terrorist attack that killed the American ambassador to Libya — contradicting remarks made a day earlier by disgraced ex-CIA chief David Petraeus.

...

The edits would have been made after the statements had left the CIA for review by the Defense and State departments, ultimately landing at the White House.

But instead of relaying what the CIA initially reported, UN Ambassador Susan Rice repeatedly insisted the attack was a spontaneous protest spurred by an American-made video depicting Prophet Mohammed as a pedophile.

One falsity in all this is this pretense that if it "comes from another department" the White House isn't involved. Are we pretending these people are entirely isolated from each other with a virtual fire-wall between them? No, these people are always talking. I think the White House helps "shape" things in State and Defense. And certain helps their idiot Clapper make the points they want him to.

Posted by: Ace at 11:59 AM | Comments (366)
Post contains 245 words, total size 2 kb.

Afternoon Morons and Ettes! Zakn back this week at the helm. Big thanks to The Dude for filling in. He'll be doing more of that in the future. So big ups.

On the Gaming front, I think the big Story of the week is the release of Nintendo's follow up to the Wii, the Wii U. The question I have for Moronland is if you bought a Wii, is this new system even on your Radar?

More Below the fold. more...

Posted by: Gang of Gaming Morons! at 09:30 AM | Comments (101)
Post contains 609 words, total size 4 kb.

Whoa.. Baylor. Holy cow.

Hope you're all having a great weekend.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 08:31 AM | Comments (174)
Post contains 19 words, total size 1 kb.

"In the future, someone will invent a global communications network which will be used to the great benefit of-- no, strike that, they'll probably just use it to swap fart jokes."

Good morning, 'rons and 'ettes, and welcome to the Sunday Morning Book Thread.

Just so you know, that whole communist thing I tried to get into last week didn't work out so well. Oh sure, I had lots of fun doing the dorm-room bull sessions about who should own the means of production and whatever, getting high, not having to get up for work, and crapping on police cars cars, but some of you in the comments thought that the constant eye-rolling would be a problem, and you were right. Not only did I almost give myself away more than once, but now I have some sort of ocular degeneration that my opthalmologist says he's never seen before. Plus, do you know how bad those guys smell? Go hang out at Kos for awhile, and it's kind of like a combination of poopy diapers, unwashed hair, and the bottom end of Michael Moore's garbage disposal.

So, I'm back. I may be on the losing side, but at least it's clean.

What I'm Reading

Given my present situation with my parents recently deceased, I decided to try A Grief Observed, the one book by C.S. Lewis I've never read. I figured now would be an apropriate time to listen to what the great man had to say about loss and grief.
more...

Posted by: Open Blogger at 06:55 AM | Comments (219)
Post contains 798 words, total size 5 kb.

[Picture Content Here]

Posted by: andy at 03:27 AM | Comments (397)
Post contains 8 words, total size 1 kb.