Taken from David Thompson.

Harrowing, but I promise it all works out. more...

Posted by: Ace at 09:08 AM | Comments (144)
Post contains 32 words, total size 1 kb.

But this time, gun bans will -- like socialism -- finally work out.

It's just a matter of having the Right Elites running things, and this time we finally have the Right Elites.

Ignore the fact that all previous iterations of the Right Elites turned out to be the Wrong Elites, even though they thought they were the Right Elites. The current Right Elites are truly the right elites.

This time, it'll work.

We aren't alone in facing this problem. Great Britain and Australia, for example, suffered mass shootings in the 1980s and 1990s. Both countries had very stringent gun laws when they occurred. Nevertheless, both decided that even stricter control of guns was the answer. Their experiences can be instructive.

In 1987, Michael Ryan went on a shooting spree in his small town of Hungerford, England, killing 16 people (including his mother) and wounding another 14 before shooting himself. Since the public was unarmed—as were the police—Ryan wandered the streets for eight hours with two semiautomatic rifles and a handgun before anyone with a firearm was able to come to the rescue.

Nine years later, in March 1996, Thomas Hamilton, a man known to be mentally unstable, walked into a primary school in the Scottish town of Dunblane and shot 16 young children and their teacher. He wounded 10 other children and three other teachers before taking his own life.

In England, gun crime actually went up after gun bans; in Australia, it declined marginally, but criminals used other weapons to almost erase any declines.

But Our Elites are the elitest of all elites. They've got this.

Trust them. They listen to NPR. So they know what they're doing.

I've previously noted that Something, perpetually, Must Be Done.

One of the most frustrating thing about the politically unaware is their unchanging belief that Something must be done! (all attempts to panic the public into agreeing that Something Must Be Done! are directed at this cohort), but they have little idea of what, specifically, should be done. Something. You know, something. Something must be done, why are you not getting this?

...

It's the single thing they know about politics -- Something must be done.

Democrats have a natural advantage in playing to this crowd, as they are promiscuously in favor of government action in the first place.

Posted by: Ace at 08:36 AM | Comments (212)
Post contains 414 words, total size 3 kb.

It's always that way.

A group of us had occupied a piece of land on St George’s Hill in Surrey, in the hope of establishing a “common treasury for all.” Our aim had been to rekindle interest in land reform. It had been going well – we had placated the police, started to generate plenty of public interest – when two young lads with brindled Staffordshire bull terriers arrived in an old removals van. Everyone was welcome at the site and, as they were travellers, one of the groups marginalised by the concentration of control and ownership of land in Britain, we went out of our way to accommodate them. They must have thought they had died and gone to heaven.

Almost as soon as they arrived they began twocking stuff. A radio journalist left his equipment in his hire car. They smashed the side window. Someone saw them bundling the kit, wrapped in a stolen sleeping bag, into their lorry. There was a confrontation – handwringing appeals to reason on one side, pugnacious defiance on the other – which eventually led to the equipment being handed back. They wound their dogs up, making them snap and snarl at the other occupiers. At night they roamed the camp, staffies straining at the leash, cans of Special Brew in their free hands, shouting “fucking hippies, we’re going to burn you in your tents!”

We had no idea how to handle them without offending our agonised liberal consciences. They saw this and exploited it ruthlessly.

Sounds like these boys actually practiced what Monibiot only wanted to preach about.

Posted by: Ace at 07:15 AM | Comments (312)
Post contains 324 words, total size 2 kb.

• American Apocalypse
  
• Comet To Light Up The Night Sky In 2013?
  
• NY State Senator Slams Asinine Newspaper Editors Who Published Gun Permit Map
  
• Police Need To Leave David Gregory Alone, They Clearly Have Better Things To Do
  
• Feds And Media Jump To Gregory's Defense
  
• George HW Bush In Intensive Care
  
• Journalists Rush To Take Sides In Gun Debate
  
• This Is Why A Shark Filled Aquarium In A Shopping Center Is A Bad Idea
  
• Russia Set To Ban US Adoptions
  
• Piers Morgan Suggests We Amend The Bible
  
• Toure Refuses To Lie to His Children And Let Them Believe Santa Is Real
  
• David Gregory, Meet James O'Keefe
  
• LA Has A Gun Buy Back
  
• The End Of The Lavish Chinese Banquet
  
• Ted Kennedy Jr Abdicates The Throne
  
• Ignore The Pundits, Conservatism Doesn't Need A Makeover
  
• Chelsea Clinton, Still NBCs Pretend Journalist
  
• Blogger Creates Interactive Map Of Employees Of Paper Which Published Names Of Gun Permit Holders
  
• Rosie O'Donnell Finally Makes It To New York To Help With Sandy Relief Efforts
  
• Hawai'i Lt. Gov Picked To Fill Inouye's Seat
  

Follow me on twitter.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 05:15 AM | Comments (277)
Post contains 187 words, total size 3 kb.

The tv talking heads are all aflutter about Obama "cutting his vacation short" to "address the fiscal cliff".

Give me a break. They had 2 years to deal with this. They might as well say "Obama heroically crams for test".

Posted by: andy at 03:35 AM | Comments (246)
Post contains 48 words, total size 1 kb.

Is It Time For Conservatives to Sit Down in the Snow?

At one point, according to notes taken by a participant, Mr. Boehner told the president, "I put $800 billion [in tax revenue] on the table. What do I get for that?"

"You get nothing," the president said. "I get that for free."

William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection argues that in the face of an Administration determined to run the country off the fiscal cliff and hang the blame on them perhaps it's time for Conservatives to begin acting like true dissidents:

Sharansky spend almost a decade in Soviet prison because of his activities on behalf of Jews who wanted to emigrate to Israel. Sharansky was subjected to torture and other indignities, but never lost his spirit. Sharansky notoriously refused to obey even the most mundane orders from his captors. Sharansky understood that to compromise even a little would lead to compromising a lot. Throughout his ordeal, Sharansky kept his spirits alive by reading a small book of psalms.

As Sharansky was being led to the airplane that would take him from the Soviet Union to East Germany for the exchange, the Soviets confiscated his book of psalms.It would have been easy for Sharansky simply to keep walking towards the plane and freedom. But Sharansky understood that the Soviets confiscated his book of psalms not because they wanted the book, but because they wanted to show that even in this last moment, they were in control.

In front of reporters covering his departure, Sharansky sat in the snow refusing to move unless the Soviets gave him back his book of psalms. Here was this diminutive man, after 10 years in prison, on the verge of freedom, refusing to budge unless one of the world's two superpowers gave him back his book. And give him back his book of psalms they did. Sharansky proceeded to the plane, where he read Psalm 30: "I will extol thee, O Lord; for thou hast lifted me up, and hast not made my foes to rejoice over me."

...Isn't it time for conservatives and supporters of free enterprise, individual liberty, and capitalism in the Congress and elsewhere to do the political equivalent of sitting down in the snow? When told by the new administration, the majority party in Congress, and the mainstream media to walk straight, isn't it time to zig and zag?

The GOP could learn a few lessons from the Refuseniks.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 05:14 PM | Comments (619)
Post contains 965 words, total size 10 kb.

Read the beat-down of Glenn Thrush of Politico. DrewM. and Gabe both get in some shots.

The mentality that High Status People -- Friends of Obama, wealthy liberals -- have a general license to ignore the laws they inflict on others is so entrenched they're not even aware of its presence.

Posted by: Ace at 04:20 PM | Comments (139)
Post contains 89 words, total size 1 kb.

Blech.

The beginning of this movie is probably the best beginning of a Bond movie in the whole canon. For example, there's a motorcycle chase that winds up on the rooftops of buildings that is actually very cool. It's not CGI, it's guys actually driving motorcycles on rooftops (or, I should say, flat surfaces on the top of peaked roofs that look suspiciously like a stunt team placed them there), so you can't shout That's impossible! Guys are actually doing it, so it's not quite impossible.

The best sequence is probably when Bond first comes to Shanghai. It's one of the bests exploitations of a city I've seen in a movie. Bond movies are partly disguised travelogues, you know. Well, Bond books are that; the movies are a little bit that. The photography in Shanghai is just outstanding, and really what movie-making is all about. I did not know that Shanghai was this developed and modern looking, and I didn't know it had some kind of multilevel highway system with strange blue lights illuminating the cars on lower levels.

I can't say "I felt like I was really there!" or anything, but I did get a sense of a place I'd never been before.

And then the plot starts happening, which is a Bad Thing. The movie becomes pretty unimaginative as it strains to find a way to put Bond on Javier Bardum's trail. He sees a girl, realizes instantly she works for Bardum, and then turns her to his side in a brief bit of conversation which recalls the film The Man With the Golden Gun's Maud Adams. (Like Adams' character, the girl here is sexual prisoner of the elite covert operative and welcomes Bond's offer to kill him for her.) Then we have a random fight which involves, at some point, a Poisonous Creature of Some Type. (Here, Komodo dragons. One gets the sense from this -- and this is true of many Bond movies -- that these are plot bits that have been floating around as discarded story ideas from the time of You Only Live Twice.)

You know that Disguised Travelogue aspect I've mentioned about the Bond stories? Sometimes the writers/directors contrive reasons for a Hot New Setting, and people just go there because The Director Told Them To. The location doesn't seem to arise naturally, organically, because of events that are actually happening, but simply because The Director Wanted To Get This Place Into The Movie.

Well, apparently the Director was on the Internet a couple of years ago when Battleship Island started going around people's sidebars, and he shoehorned it into the movie. It's a good setting, but it's pretty random that the villain wants to meet Bond there, and they give the island an absurd backstory, something about the villain wanting to prove to the Chinese he was a Really Bad Guy and so creating some kind of poisonous gas release to drive everyone out.

As I knew something about Battleship Island -- well, not much, really, but I did know that Javier Bardum hadn't destroyed it in a bout of chemical gas terrorism in the past couple years -- it just took me out of the movie. I mean, just looking at the ruins you can see they're more than four or five years old.

If you're going to shoehorn it, why not just have the Villain say, "I wanted to meet you here, Bond, because you're as much of a ruined derelict as the city?" Just let the villain offer an off-hand reason as to why he's shoehorning it in. Don't claim a fairly famous ruin is Something the Villain Made So He Could Have His Secret Base. I mean, why not just go to Paris and claim Bardem created the Eiffel Tour on a bar bet?

Soon after, the Villain (mild spoiler in this sentence, and I call it mild because it's pretty obvious) permits himself to be captured in order to execute an baroquely complicated Scheme which seems to be much more easily accomplished without the whole Allowing-Yourself-To-Be-Captured part. And he reveals that he has a grotesque facial deformation involving the mouth, due to an old injury, which injury has deranged him and made him Chaotic Evil.

In other words, at this point the film becomes James Bond vs. Gay Joker.

The villain definitely is extremely Joker-like. But what works in a more fantastical universe doesn't work here, partly because the Daniel Craig Bond films are less (a little less, but still) fantastical than the Batman films, and also because We Just Saw This Movie Three Years Ago And It Was Better Before.

Before I get at the end-bits, which is where the film falls apart entirely, let me savage the dialogue. There is a tradition in Bond films of Witty Repartee. Or, I think, Ostensibly Witty Repartee. Now, the other Bond films were kind of corn-bag so that sort of thing flies.

"Witty" quips which aren't witty do not fly in the more Jason-Bourne-like New Bond Universe. In many cases these quips don't even make sense -- I could see in a couple of occasions where the dialogue that would have set up the quip was cut out of the film, but they adored the quip so much they kept it in-- even though the line no longer follows from the last one.

Finally, the end. The end of this movie would have almost saved it being, as you might have heard, a Straw Dogs type ending. Not a huge spectacle, but just a couple of people in an abandoned English (well, Scottish) country-house defending themselves with shotgun, hunting rifle, and improvised traps.

I loved those bits. The traps were great.

The problem is that none of the ending makes sense. Let me just explain a tiny bit of the plot (which is signaled in the first fifteen minutes of the movie, so it's no spoiler): Javier Bardem has a grudge against M and wants to kill her. It's what the whole movie is about. There's a MacGuffin involving (for the fifth time) a stolen NOC list (a list of the West's deep-cover agents), and everyone wants that back, but that was stolen in the first place to service Bardem's Revenge Plot.

Past the middle of the movie, this list -- which was sold as crucially important to the West -- is never mentioned again, despite not being recovered. I'll get back to that in a minute.

Now, to save M, Bond takes her to this abandoned country manor. Okay, no problem. The problem is that the British Secret Service knows he's taking her there, as does the whole of England's Army, Territorial Army, and police forces.

And yet Javier Bardem shows up anyway to attack the house. Which is in Scotland-- not exactly foreign territory to the UK (yet). And he shows up to attack it thinking that there won't be a bazillion police and troops waiting there to arrest him.

That's fine; I can accept the idea that Bond tricked Bardem.

The problem is, Bond didn't trick Badem. Despite Bardem being the World's Most Dangerous Criminal Outside of a Batman Movie, no one from England's police, intelligence services, or army intercedes to stop or kill Bardem.

Even though they all knew Bond's plan. Even though you would think they would understand "Now here's where we move in and kill these guys, finally."

The ending just doesn't make sense, and the movie just went off the rails for me here. Don't get me wrong, I think the idea of a very small-scale home defense would make a great, uncharacteristic (and therefore new-ish) ending for a Bond movie.

The problem is, as the plot in this movie is written, it doesn't make sense. It makes great dramatic sense, for the movie, that only Bond and M and a caretaker would be on the property to ward off all those heavily armed bad guys.

But it makes no sense in the reality of the situation, according to the movie's reality. It simply makes no sense that MI-6 (and the entire territorial army) just says "Eh, we'll let Bond handle this. For the dramatic possibilities of the situation."

Here's what I think happened: I think in the original script, and maybe the movie as originally shot, Bardem proposes an odious deal to the British government: Let me have M., and I'll return the NOC list that was first stolen by Tom Cruise in Mission: Impossible. I think in the original story or originally-shot footage, the British government -- or at least some of the Bad Actors in it, who are in fact present in the film -- agreed to this odious deal.

This would explain why the NOC list was no longer mentioned in the movie (Bardem turned it over) and also why only Bond was available to defend M (because the rest of the government had been ordered to stand down in order to let Bardem have his prize).

But then they cut that stuff out (poor audience reaction? felt like no one pays attention to the plot anyway, so who cares?) and just re-shot some dialogue to cover the edit.

But then they left the basic situation in place -- Bond, absolutely alone, in defending the standing head of the British Secret Service, getting no help from a single cop on the beat in all of England, and the NOC list entirely forgotten as a plot device. Resulting in a movie that actually makes no sense, as it stands.

The actual ending, the epilogue, is a mixed bag. There is One Thing that will make Old Time Bond fans happy, and other thing that will make them howl in Fanboy Rage.

Overall: A terrific first half hour, and a great small-scale shootout at the end with lots of brutal boobytraps, but a plot which is greatly derivative of previous Bond movies -- and Batman movies -- often contrived, and which is ultimately absolutely senseless.

Where's the Payoff? Oh, one more thing. They do the whole Dark Knight Rises plotline by featuring a battered Bond who's lost a couple of steps in his game trying to get back into form. The film notes, explicitly, he failed his fitness test in virtually every way that matters -- gun accuracy, fitness, all of it.

So, you're thinking: Bond will struggle through most of the movie, then maybe somehow he'll dig down deep at the end and accomplish something important.

What actually happens is that Bond pretty much just starts shooting people with his characteristic near-perfect accuracy with a pistol immediately after missing 1 (one) single solitary shot. The film sets up this dramatic arc, then just decides "No one wants to see Bond miss" and just have him be An Ultimate Badass, as usual.

He missed one shot. Not exactly the travails of Hercules.

Posted by: Ace at 03:05 PM | Comments (228)
Post contains 1819 words, total size 11 kb.

So it can be done after all!

First of all, we're going to hit the debt limit on Monday. The Treasury will take a series of measures, such as delaying schedule payments to pension funds, to make $200 billion in breathing room.

"These extraordinary measures ... can create approximately $200 billion in headroom under the debt limit," Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner wrote in a letter to congressional leaders.

Normally, these measures would buy the Treasury about two months time before hitting the debt ceiling, Geithner said in the letter. But a series of planned tax hikes and spending cuts due to take effect in early January could give Treasury further time if they take effect as scheduled, he said.

Since The Media is supposedly in favor of "compromise," it's curious that they never ask Democrats how they might be prepared to compromise.

Maria Bartiromo actually did ask a Democrat that, Sen. Ben Cardin.

Answer: He's not willing to compromise on anything. His Plan A, Plan B, Plan C, and Plan D are all the same: Higher taxes.

Posted by: Ace at 01:52 PM | Comments (219)
Post contains 216 words, total size 2 kb.

Awesome. Many of the usual suspects, but some fresh, disappointing faces, like Amy Poehler and Rasida Jones and Jeremy Renner (who carries a gun and shoots people in every movie he makes, except for the ones where he carries a bow and shoots people).

How come every Celebrities-Endorse-a-Policy-or-Candidate commercial is the exact same type -- each one saying one or two words, that word repeated by multiple speakers with minor variations, etc.? Like this:

People.

People.

People who need.

Need.

People.

People who need people.

Are the luckiest.

Luckiest.

People.

In the world.

In the world.

People.

People.

People.

World People.

Hmph, I thought these were creative types. How come it's always the same g-damn thing?

Posted by: Ace at 12:41 PM | Comments (250)
Post contains 154 words, total size 1 kb.