Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.

Winston Churchill, commending the bravery, and victory of the Royal Air Force over the Nazi Luftwaffe in the summer of 1940.

If I were to swipe it and amend it to address the OWS ninnies, and I am about to do that, I'd say "Never in the field of human conflict were so many annoyed by so few".

Oakland gets more of the nonsense.

I can't recall a more media-driven nothing story than the "Occupy" story. Brainless twits who couldn't express themselves coherently, had absolutely no idea what they were actually protesting, and yet protested with so much vigor.

Not new, by the way. It's been around.

Peggy Maley: "What are you rebelling against, Johnny?"

Johnny Strabler: "Whaddaya got?"

The Wild One, 1953.

Incoherent rage, pushed by users of this sort of thing, and political enablers who test the winds of populism and set sail and policy in accordance. Constituents and taxpayers be damned.

UPDATED: Man, you cheerleader fans are strict. Ok, Pro Bowl babe, south of the fold. more...

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 02:54 PM | Comments (386)
Post contains 202 words, total size 1 kb.

The second installment of Ben Howe's broadcast show airs tonight from 6pm-8pm Eastern. It's on WBT 1110AM in Charlotte, NC, if you're in the area. If not, there's a livestream at the link, and he'll also be taking calls at (704) 570-1110.

As a reminder, Ben's in competition with another host for a full-time show, and it would be great if the Moron Nation would lend its support.

Dramatization below the fold, and open thread in the comments.

more...

Posted by: andy at 01:01 PM | Comments (228)
Post contains 94 words, total size 1 kb.

Oops.

Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

Meanwhile, leading climate scientists yesterday told The Mail on Sunday that, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a ‘grand minimum’ in its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening of the season available for growing food.

Solar output goes through 11-year cycles, with high numbers of sunspots seen at their peak.

We are now at what should be the peak of what scientists call ‘Cycle 24’ – which is why last week’s solar storm resulted in sightings of the aurora borealis further south than usual. But sunspot numbers are running at less than half those seen during cycle peaks in the 20th Century.

Astonishingly, the Met Office says it doesn't expect another Maunder-like "grand minimum" to lower temperatures much on Earth because, and I'm not making this up, the sun doesn't have all that great an impact on temperature. Really:

Yet, in its paper, the Met Office claimed that the consequences now would be negligible – because the impact of the sun on climate is far less than man-made carbon dioxide. Although the sun’s output is likely to decrease until 2100, ‘This would only cause a reduction in global temperatures of 0.08C.’ Peter Stott, one of the authors, said: ‘Our findings suggest a reduction of solar activity to levels not seen in hundreds of years would be insufficient to offset the dominant influence of greenhouse gases.’

These findings are fiercely disputed by other solar experts.

I'll bet.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 11:39 AM | Comments (195)
Post contains 323 words, total size 2 kb.

See, in 1945, the Nazi remnant evacuated earth to set up a base on the dark side of the moon*. And now they're invading the planet. more...

Posted by: Ace at 10:38 AM | Comments (158)
Post contains 173 words, total size 1 kb.

Tough stuff for any parent.

Isabella was born with Trisomy 18, a rare genetic disorder. Most infants with this disorder donÂ’t live to see their first birthday.

Posted by: Ace at 09:26 AM | Comments (92)
Post contains 47 words, total size 1 kb.

From what I see, it's, how do I put this gently, "Blogger Nonsense."

Although I can see where there would be confusion, the surrogate seems to be talking about the "Romney Plan" even though she was asked about RomneyCare vis a vis ObamaCare.

"Romney Plan" I take to mean the plan Romney has suggested for health care. That is, his campaign platform plan. Which contains the usual widgets that everyone talks about.

Which is not the same as "RomneyCare." The woman never says anything like what it's claimed she says -- she never says, as the headline at Gateway Pundit would have it, that Romney's plan is for RomneyCare in each state.

Obviously he has a plan regarding health care and has talked about that. And obviously, this being his own plan, he's in favor of it. But it's all the typical stuff like cross-state insurance sales.

One can have a reasonable suspicion that Romney thinks that RomneyCare would be a perfectly good plan for a state to implement. This suspicion could arise from various bits of data, like Romney directly saying that RomneyCare would be a perfectly good plan for a state to implement. And having previously written in book a line that suggests that RomneyCare would be a perfectly good plan for a state to implement.

But that is not "Romney's Plan" for health care (on a federal level), and the surrogate does not say it is.

This isn't "spin." I'm telling you what the woman actually said -- actually, listen for yourself. Don't take my word for it.

Show me the passage where she says "Romney wants RomneyCare for each state."

She doesn't. That's the spin. She's speaking of "Romney's plan," and it does not appear as if she thinks she's making headlines. Why assume that she must be making Huge News by announcing Romney's got a secret plan (now out of the bag, whoops!) to replace his stated plan with "RomneyCare for everyone"?

more...

Posted by: Ace at 08:09 AM | Comments (341)
Post contains 349 words, total size 2 kb.

The day it happened.

Attorney General Eric Holder’s Department of Justice dumped documents related to Operation Fast and Furious on congressional officials late Friday night. Central to this document dump is a series of emails showing Holder was informed of slain Border Patrol agent Brian Terry’s murder on the day it happened – December 15, 2010 – and that he was informed the weapons used to kill Terry were from Fast and Furious on the same day.

...

That email was sent at 2:31 a.m. on the day Terry was shot. One hour later, a follow-up email read: “Our agent has passed away.”

Burke forwarded those two emails to Holder’s then-deputy chief of staff Monty Wilkinson later that morning, adding that the incident was “not good” because it happened “18 miles w/in” the border.

Wilkinson responded to Burke shortly thereafter and said the incident was “tragic.” “I’ve alerted the AG [Holder], the Acting DAG, Lisa, etc.”

Then, later that day, Burke followed up with Wilkinson after Burke discovered from officials whose names are redacted that the guns used to kill Terry were from Fast and Furious. “The guns found in the desert near the murder BP officer connect back to the investigation we were going to talk about – they were AK-47s purchased at a Phoenix gun store,” Burke wrote to Wilkinson.

“I’ll call tomorrow,” Wilkinson responded.

Unless we're to believe that Wilkinson never made that call -- and I have a feeling we will be asked to believe that, very shortly -- this directly contradicts Eric Holder's claim to have only found out about gunwalking "a few weeks" (later amended to "a few months") before his May 2011 testimony.

Posted by: Ace at 07:31 AM | Comments (126)
Post contains 330 words, total size 2 kb.

I haven't picked up any new books since last week -- I've mainly been trying to work my way through my various in-progress reading projects (in particular Richard Taruskin's Oxford History of Western Music). My lack of formalized music training slows me down, but I'm making my way up the face of the cliff, one handhold at a time.

I also started reading Steven Goldberg's classic sociology work Why Men Rule: A Theory of Male Dominance. (I bought it a long while back but haven't gotten to it until now.) I thought it would be interesting to see how Goldberg mounts his argument in these politically-correct times.

It is an academic work, not a "popular" book, so Goldberg's thesis has faced the full wrath of the feminized academy and defeated all comers (so far). Goldberg's book has caused a lot of gnashing of teeth in all the right quarters, which means that he is probably on to something. I presume that Goldberg is a man of the left -- as a professor of sociology at a major New York university, that is almost certainly statistically the case -- but so far in my reading he has been very careful to stay away from ideological axe-grinding. The book simply posits that patriarchy is the overwhelmingly default mode for human societies, both ancient and modern; he takes no official stance on the morality or desirability of such a thing. He also is careful to point out that his statements about males and females are statistical statements and apply at the social level. I get the feeling that a lot of the feminist animus against his book is from people who never bothered to read it closely (or at all).

--------------------

Keep sending those book recommendations to aoshqbookthread AT gmail DOT com. Whether the books are your own, the product of a friend, spouse, child, parent, or complete stranger -- send them along!

This week's moron book recommendations:

Russell Bonds sends a pair of American Civil War history books he has written: Stealing the General: The Great Locomotive Chase and the First Medal of Honor and War Like the Thunderbolt: The Battle and Burning of Atlanta.

Grace McLoughlin sends a book by Father Patrick Henry Reardon, The Jesus We Missed: The Surprising Truth About the Humanity of Christ.

Posted by: Monty at 06:46 AM | Comments (68)
Post contains 391 words, total size 3 kb.

After he dropped out, Herman Cain told any news outlet that would have him that he would make an "unconventional endorsement" in the presidential contest at the SRLC, right before the South Carolina primary. True to his word, he endorsed "We the People" that day. Yesterday, he took another swing at it and endorsed Newt Gingrich.

This time it was much more conventional:

“Surprise, Surprise,” Cain said as he walked out on stage. “I hereby officially and enthusiastically endorse Newt Gingrich for the president of the Unites States.”

Cain gave several reasons for why he reached this “public decision.”

“One of the biggest is the fact I know Speaker Gingrich is a patriot,” Cain said. “Speaker Gingrich is not afraid of bold ideas and I also know Speaker Gingrich is running for president and going through this sausage grinder and I know what the sausage grinder is all about.

“Speaker Gingrich is running because he cares about the future of the United States of America, we all do,” Cain said.

How will this help Gingrich? Well...

Every little bit helps, right?

New NBC/Marist poll has Romney up 15 in Florida: I'm not suggesting that these numbers are related to Cain's endorsement; I just don't think this deserves it's own post.

The latest polling in Florida has Romney over Gingrich 42-27 percent. Santorum got a five point bump from the last poll, which puts him at 16 percent, over Ron Paul's meager 11.

Oh, Not An Outlier: The Miami Herald and Rasmussen both have similar numbers for Florida.

Miami Herald - Romney 42, Gingrich 31, Santorum 14, Paul 6
Rasmussen - Romney 44, Gingrich 28, Santorum 12, Paul 10

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 05:07 AM | Comments (238)
Post contains 294 words, total size 3 kb.

It's that day we've been looking forward to for a year. That's right, it's Pro Bowl day!

Please try to contain your excitement.

Posted by: andy at 03:24 AM | Comments (107)
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.