Someone today, with a hash we've never, ever seen before, is posting blind links in the comments.

Don't click on such links.

Posted by: Ace at 03:08 PM | Comments (110)
Post contains 42 words, total size 1 kb.

I'm writing a post about what's happened to Ali Akbar. It's taking some time.

Warning: DO NOT CLICK ON ANY SITE YOU DON'T TRUST ABOUT THIS STORY. I think there is reasonable grounds for suspicion that your IP will be captured, and a malicious tracking cookie (or worse) inserted onto your computer.

Do not click on any of the "bad" sites for this. Only go to trusted sites.

I am sorry if this warning comes too late -- I had it in my actual post on Ali.

Have Internet Situational Awareness, here. I do not know if my suspicious are accurate, but there is no harm in being prudent.

...

For now, I'm just going to write this, to let people know my plan.

On Friday, this site will be absolutely dead-silent, which is what Brett Kimberlin and his stalker crew seeks, and what the media and our supposed Representatives in Congress would permit.

The only post on Friday will be a bold-faced Open Letter to Congress, urging them to act and not attempt to pass the buck to others.

They are our representatives; we would like some representation.

They vowed to defend and protect the Constitution; they can honor that vow now.

I will post links of Congressmen's and Senator's email addresses and offices and phone numbers, and urge every concerned American citizen to let them know, in no uncertain terms, that a crime in progress against the First Amendment (and people's safety) is occurring, and we humbly request they take this seriously.

They are literally going to get someone killed. That is their endgame here.

Will the media and Congress pretend "we didn't know" when this happens?

ABCNews knows.

The Weekly Standard knows.

The Daily Caller knows.

And many, but not yet all, Congressmen and Senators know.

I encourage all bloggers and twitterers to essentially strike that day, or write nothing except your desire that you expect your Congressmen to take threats to your First Amendment rights seriously.

Oh: Do not be provoked into saying something jackass. That's how he got Aaron Walker arrested and charged, unconstitutionally, with incitement.

Everytime you say something intemperate, Brett Kimberlin smiles. Because he just screencaps that and says "Your Honor, I'm the victim here."

The way this gets won is by law -- starting with Congress.

Posted by: Ace at 01:25 PM | Comments (334)
Post contains 400 words, total size 2 kb.

Everything bad is good for you. To recap:

• High-fat diets are good for you.
• High-fat diets help you lose weight.
• Steak and lard and bacon are good eats.
• Low salt diets increase the risk of death.
• Diet soda makes you fat.
• Salt helps your body get rid of bad cholesterol.

Last week we learned that exercise may increase heart risk.

By analyzing data from six rigorous exercise studies involving 1,687 people, the group found that about 10 percent actually got worse on at least one of the measures related to heart disease: blood pressure and levels of insulin, HDL cholesterol or triglycerides. About 7 percent got worse on at least two measures. And the researchers say they do not know why.

“It is bizarre,” said Claude Bouchard, lead author of the paper . . . .

Yes, bizarre. Because we're so smart. And the body is such a simple mechanism. more...

Posted by: rdbrewer at 01:06 PM | Comments (176)
Post contains 678 words, total size 5 kb.

Over 206,000 absentees have been issued so far in the recall.
A detailed list county by county is here (scroll down to bottom).
2010 total absentees: 230,000
2008 total absentees: 633,000

Comparison of returned absentees:
Waukesha County(27,100 in) trails Dane County(Madison) (28,180 in) by only 1000 absentees, behind Milwaukee County by only 7k. This despite having a fraction the population of Milwaukee and 100,000 fewer residents than Dane.

In Milwaukee County a grand total of just over 20,000 voters did so in-person, 18,000 are mailing 'em in.

HUGE absentee numbers in Washington, Ozaukee, and Brown.

In-person voting (early) numbers: Dane and Milwaukee county combined (population 1.47 million): 41,500. In-person voting (early) numbers: Waukesha (population 389k):15,800.

Posted by: CAC at 12:42 PM | Comments (119)
Post contains 123 words, total size 1 kb.

The illusions they cling to.

This capsulizes various reports from inside the White House, including reporter's comments and tidbits pulled from books about Obama's presidency.

It's not a pretty picture. I can't quote it all, so I'll just quote a few tasty morsels.

The beginning is about the four main critiques of Obama from liberals. As usual, it's the typical claptrap about "communications," Obama having too high a moral character to join Republicans in the gutter, and two related problems: that Obama's stimulus package was not big enough (and not socialist enough), which is caused by the second problem, that Obama cares too much about high deficits and therefore is too much of a fiscal conservative debt-hawk.

So the typical stuff: Obama simply cannot cure low-information voters of their resilient stupidity, Obama is too good to prosper in Evil America, and Obama's far too conservative to make sound policy choices.

Fine answers all.

Then the article begins diagnosing Obama's character -- based on reportage from largely left-wing sources.

Perhaps the most unattractive personality trait that emerges from the various descriptions of the president is that he constantly feels underappreciated and is prone to bouts of self-pity. Obama complained that “events had conspired against him,” we read in Showdown. “He would routinely note that he had been handed ‘a real shitty deal’ when he entered the White House.” Prior to the 2010 election, a former senior White House official recalls to Corn: “The world seemed to be going to shit. The president was doing his best, but it was impossible to get credit.”

I wonder how many other people have worked their whole lives for a very high-status job, and then immediately began complaining the job was hard.

What did you think it would be? A "cakewalk"?

A senior administration official lamented that, in Corn’s words, “being responsible for preventing adverse consequences was [a] lonely duty in Washington.” The president and members of his economic team “believed they had not received sufficient credit for having passed a variety of modest-sized job measures.” In speaking about the business community, Obama complained:

“I saved these guys when the economy was falling off a cliff. Now I get nothing but their venom.”

And Corn relays an even more extraordinary episode: “We’re losing white males,” Obama said to a private gathering of labor leaders. “Fed by Fox News, they hear Obama is a Muslim 24/7, and it begins to seep in….The Republicans have been at this for 40 years. They have new resources, but the strategy is old.” This line of thinking is something conjured up in a Manichean, make-believe world. One gets the sense that Obama really believes it, and that he is not alone.

The article then turns to the state-of-mind of contemporary liberalism, noting, for example, that Obama is the least "obstructed" President since FDR in '33 and LBJ in '65 -- for two full years, he had absolutely unchecked free reign. He got everything he wanted.

It's true he's had less success in the following year and a half -- but that's because all the things he got in his first two years failed to improve the nation's circumstance, and he was therefore dealt a historic repudiation at the polls.

Sill, that said: Most of a president's policies are passed in the honeymoon period or not at all. Obama got much more than most presidents get.

George Bush's last two years in office featured an entire Congress (and not just the House) controlled by Democrats. He also faced some obstruction.

But all this excuse-making is of course in service of a simple goal: To avoid conceding any flaws in socialism itself. They will, in the end, always throw the Man and the Execution under the bus in order to keep the Socialism Bus rolling along.

However, there's always a more tempting scapegoat: The dull-witted, racist, fearful American people themselves.

If Obama goes on to lose his bid for reelection, it would be yet another crushing blow to liberalism. And in reading these books, it is hard to avoid the impression that the effort to explain a 2012 defeat is already under way.

...

Axelrod then summed up the case for Obama: “This may not be entirely satisfying, but he believes his highest responsibility is to get things done.” Axelrod’s own job, as he understands it, has been to “find a way to convey this, to politically monetize character.” He added, “It’s not entirely apparent you can do that.”

If the president loses in November, the left, ever in search of narratives, will settle on this one: Barack Obama was simply too good for America.

In other Obama-related news, the RNC is now running an Obama ad.

Sort of. It's the instantly-infamous Anna "Devil Wears Prada" Wintour ad, with unemployment figures running below it. (Embedded after the fold.)

Bob Shrum says if Obama runs on his record, he'll lose.

So he won't do that/isn't doing that.

A CNN poll of adults -- really? Not even voters? -- find Obama with a three point lead, which means he's actually trailing.

Worst yet, even with adults, Romney's favorability numbers have jumped fourteen points since February. (Duh-- I meant Romney's favorables climbed 14 points, not Obama's!)

Romney and Obama now have identical unfavorable figures -- 42% each -- while Obama, supposedly, with adults, enjoys a higher margin of favorability, 56-42 as opposed to Romney's 48-42.

That's not a terribly wide gulf, and it's only the beginning of June. And the impact of the third month straight of Double-Dip Warning jobs numbers isn't reflected in those numbers yet.

And it's a poll of adults, meaning that a 7 point advantage for Democrats is baked into the cake, IIRC. (If my memory fails me, please let me know-- I think Nate Silver has found that a poll of registered adults gives Democrats an artificial four point advantage as compared to actual vote share, and a poll of adults gives them a 7 point advantage.)

One more thing: Obama's losing big-dollar donors. We already knew that.

He's also losing small-dollar donors, Buzzfeed finds, and by an eyepopping stat: 90% of under-$200 donors who donated in 2008 haven't donated to him yet.

I asked @buzzfeedben if they'd examined the timing of donations; that is, if the great bulk of Obama's small-dollar donations occurred in, say, August 2008, then we couldn't really say Obama was off-pace quite yet.

But he says that they checked that, and that Obama is off fundraising from smaller donors, month-by-month, by "similar statistics."

Similar, that is, to 90%.

That's amazing. That may be the most telling statistic I've heard yet.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 11:01 AM | Comments (500)
Post contains 1120 words, total size 8 kb.

As if it isn't already tough enough to be a Mets fan.

It's not clear how much Maher actually payed but the Mets were selling shares for $20 million. Maybe he went in halvesies with someone.

Either way buying into a major league team and dropping $1 million dollars on Obama's super-PAC is pretty much how your average member of the 99% deals with tough economic times such as these.

Shouldn't someone who thinks you should be paying more in taxes have written checks to the IRS instead of playthings like these? Better yet, Mahr seems to think "the people" know best how to spend the 1%'s money so shouldn't he have put it up to a vote?

It's almost like he's a hypocrite or something.

Posted by: DrewM at 10:35 AM | Comments (126)
Post contains 150 words, total size 1 kb.

This means she will be the nominee, up until the point cratering poll numbers suggest she can't win and she withdraws and the Democrats find a friendly judge who will let them switch to one of the Kennedy Half-Wits.

My prognostication failed me. I didn't think she'd take the nomination now; I thought her rival would at least be permitted to contest the nomination, with a vote and all.

But apparently Devall Patrick "passed out the Kool-Aid." As the linked article speculates, Democrats think that unopposed nominations lead to victory, while opposed ones result in losses, so the establishment twisted arms to give Elizabeth Warren an uncontested nomination.

There just seems to be so much cocooning in the Democratic Party.

Elizabeth Warren is going to lose. I know no Democrats believe that, because they think this story is going to go away, and that no one cares.

If no one cares, why is it in the media every day? If it's going to go away, why hasn't it yet?

This story is dangerous because it makes Elizabeth Warren into a punchline.

It's hard to elect a punchline to the Senate. Ask Christine O'Donnell.

Yes, Elizabeth Warren is just as damaged as Christine O'Donnell.

Posted by: Ace at 09:11 AM | Comments (259)
Post contains 217 words, total size 1 kb.

So there you go.

The one-hour scandal.

Posted by: Ace at 08:48 AM | Comments (238)
Post contains 63 words, total size 1 kb.

Tightened thanks to increased Democratic interest but still a long shot for Barrett to knock Walker off. Walker is projected to win by four points tomorrow.

Counties in purple are toss-ups, light/medium/dark red are, well you get the picture.

UPDATE- We Ask America released their final poll with a massive Likely Voter sample, giving Walker a twelve-point lead. This makes 10 nonpartisan(sponsored) polls giving Walker a lead, all also giving him at least 50%.

Enjoy the last enormous map of Wisconsin for a long, long time: more...

Posted by: CAC at 08:17 AM | Comments (131)
Post contains 139 words, total size 1 kb.

Soros gave a speech recently that's gotten some coverage because he blames Germany for try to kill the Euro Zone and predicting if things don't change in the next 3 months, the Euro will be dead.

I think the more interesting part is where he lets the mask down and demonstrates how trusting "the experts" can lead to disasters like this.

I contend that the European Union itself is like a bubble. In the boom phase the EU was what the psychoanalyst David Tuckett calls a “fantastic object” – unreal but immensely attractive. The EU was the embodiment of an open society –an association of nations founded on the principles of democracy, human rights, and rule of law in which no nation or nationality would have a dominant position.

The process of integration was spearheaded by a small group of far sighted statesmen who practiced what Karl Popper called piecemeal social engineering. They recognized that perfection is unattainable; so they set limited objectives and firm timelines and then mobilized the political will for a small step forward, knowing full well that when they achieved it, its inadequacy would become apparent and require a further step. The process fed on its own success, very much like a financial bubble. That is how the Coal and Steel Community was gradually transformed into the European Union, step by step.

Germany used to be in the forefront of the effort. When the Soviet empire started to disintegrate, GermanyÂ’s leaders realized that reunification was possible only in the context of a more united Europe and they were willing to make considerable sacrifices to achieve it. When it came to bargaining they were willing to contribute a little more and take a little less than the others, thereby facilitating agreement. At that time, German statesmen used to assert that Germany has no independent foreign policy, only a European one.

The process culminated with the Maastricht Treaty and the introduction of the euro. It was followed by a period of stagnation which, after the crash of 2008, turned into a process of disintegration. The first step was taken by Germany when, after the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, Angela Merkel declared that the virtual guarantee extended to other financial institutions should come from each country acting separately, not by Europe acting jointly. It took financial markets more than a year to realize the implication of that declaration, showing that they are not perfect.

The Maastricht Treaty was fundamentally flawed, demonstrating the fallibility of the authorities. Its main weakness was well known to its architects: it established a monetary union without a political union. The architects believed however, that when the need arose the political will could be generated to take the necessary steps towards a political union.

A massive reorganization of societies was organized by a "small group" who knew that their promise of limited but important integration (a shared currency) couldn't work on its own. They were patient enough to wait for the inevitable collapse that would create the conditions to allow them to do what they really wanted to do but knew they couldn't say out loud...usher in a massive political integration of Europe.

Now for a guy like Soros, this is a feature not a bug. It's far easier to exert control over "a small group of far sighted statesmen" then the restless rabble of 20 something countries bitterly clinging to their traditions, national identities and sovereignty.

He's actually annoyed the Germany may not cave and ruin the whole game. Who in the hell is Karl in Munich to say he won't work harder and pay more so that Demetrius in Athens can have his Euro and early retirement? Damn Angela Merkel and he effort to save Germany from Europe (which in turn might just save most of Europe in spite of itself).

This is the danger someone like Barack Obama (you can keep your plan if you like it but not really) or less ambitious authoritarians like Michael Bloomberg. They will sell you up front a bill of goods that sounds nice (to some ears anyway) and promise you a free ride, well except for a little bit of your freedom but don't worry, you won't miss it. When it turns out that actually to make it work they're going to need just a little bit more of your freedom but just a bit, you won't notice, plus here's a shiny thing to look at and make you feel better.

In short, these "far minded statesmen" are just well dressed drug pushers. They give you a little taste of something (FREE Health Care! Early Retirement! Fairness! etc) but then when the high wears off and the bill comes due as it always does, then they start collecting their fee.

This isn't conspiracy crap, it's simply the way the incremental ratchet works in the modern welfare state. Soros just had the honestly to admit it.

Posted by: DrewM at 07:49 AM | Comments (93)
Post contains 842 words, total size 5 kb.