Identify The Gun - Part III

Hint 1: It's in 4.5mm

Hint 2: It was developed in 1967

The answer is here and here.

Okay how about this one?

Answer here.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 05:47 PM | Comments (582)
Post contains 1036 words, total size 13 kb.

Only if you assume he's gotten a heads-up can you make the next assumption, that he's laying down a campaign theme.

Barack Obama suggested that any decision by the US Supreme Court to overturn his landmark healthcare law would send the country “backwards” and that Americans did not want to “re-fight” the battle over healthcare.

It was the first sign that beyond the White HouseÂ’s staunch defence of the Affordable Care Act Mr Obama is prepared to use the law as a rallying cry on the campaign trail. It is a risky strategy: about half the country remains opposed to the legislation, although most voters like the consumer protections that are guaranteed under the law.

...

In his comments, Mr Obama did not make any explicit references to the court, although he has said in the past that it would be “unprecedented” for the ACA to be overturned.

“The American people fight for what’s right. And the American people understand that we’re not going to make progress by going backwards. We need to go forward,” he said.

Given that the opinion was written a month ago (or so) and is only being withheld for its big Release Date on Thursday, it seems it's a bit late to be "warning" the Court on this.

Since he's not warning the Court, what is he doing?

Announcing a campaign theme?

Romney also seems to be peering into the near-future.

"As you know, the Supreme Court is gonna be dealing with whether or not Obamacare’s constitutional,” said Romney, previewing the court’s decision that is expected to be announced on Thursday.

“If it’s not, if Obamacare is not deemed constitutional, then the first three and a half years of this president’s term will have been wasted on something that has not helped the American people,” said Romney, offering his most scathing review to date of Obama’s tenure should the plan be struck down.

“If it’s not,” Romney went on, “If it is deemed to stand, then I’ll tell you one thing. Then we’ll have to have a president, and I’m that one, that’s gonna get rid of Obamacare.”

Allah thinks he should have waited until he knew the decision's holding -- otherwise, if ObamaCare is upheld, maybe he's saying Obama's first term wasn't a waste.

But I'm wondering. Seriously, I know the Court prides itself on secrecy and rectitude, but hasn't this leaked yet?

If no one in the Court has leaked this, then grab up their personnel and start training them for the CIA.

I'm just getting the feeling that we're the last to know.

Posted by: Ace at 04:08 PM | Comments (306)
Post contains 463 words, total size 3 kb.

"No Deception Indicated."

According to a “confidential report” prepared by the Sanford Police Department, Zimmerman, 28, willingly submitted to a computer voice stress analyzer (CVSA) “truth verification” on February 27. Investigators concluded that he “has told substantially the complete truth in regards to this examination.”

...

Along with questions about whether his first name was George and if it was Monday, Zimmerman was asked, “Did you confront the guy you shot?’ He answered, “No.” He was also asked, “Were you in fear for your life, when you shot the guy.” Zimmerman replied, “Yes.”

Is the media pleased with itself for taking the word of left-wing bloggers (as usual) and promoting a lynchmob atmosphere on this case?

Posted by: Ace at 02:58 PM | Comments (301)
Post contains 128 words, total size 1 kb.

brings the lulz with their latest registered voter poll, claiming Obama crushes Romney in the swing states 50-42, when blue states are collapsing (he leads Romney nationally 47-44 in the...same poll).

more...

Posted by: CAC at 02:33 PM | Comments (88)
Post contains 121 words, total size 1 kb.

One criticism of the Europe Project is that you can't have a monetary union without the political union that makes a monetary union possible. You can't have Greece running up huge deficits while Germany sticks to its low-inflation, low-deficits position.

To have a monetary union, you'd have to have an actual sovereign European government, with genuine power to set policy continent-wide.

As the project collapses, they're finally realizing that. But rather than undo the monetary union, they're considering doubling down on the political one.

rance must agree to share sovereignty over its budget with its EU partners, French Budget Minister Jerome Cahuzac said on Tuesday.

He told BFM TV and RMC radio: "This is what we are talking about, budget solidarity in Europe which implies that not only that the French budget, but also the German, Italian and Spanish budgets be subjected to a review by all our partners."

He said: "This does not mean abandoning sovereignty, it is sharing."

He accused Germany of "imagining" inflation worries "everywhere."

I don't think Germany will go for this. Germany had an emotionally-wrenching experience with inflation in the 20s (and I imagine as WWII progressed) and they've made prudence their watchword since then. The strong mark was their national pride.

I don't think the Germans are going to let the Greeks set their budgetary policy. I guess we'll have to see.

Posted by: Ace at 01:38 PM | Comments (287)
Post contains 252 words, total size 2 kb.

The DNC had planned to open their convention with an event at the Charlotte Speedway; they'll be moving it somewhere cheaper and smaller.

The move comes as party planners are grappling with a fundraising deficit of roughly $27 million, according to two people familiar with the matter who requested anonymity to discuss internal party politics. With a party ban on direct contributions from corporations, the host committee has raised less than $10 million, well short of its $36.6 million goal, said one of the people.

They claim it's for "logistical" reasons. Well, money is logistics, too.

Back in January they decided to shorten the convention from four days to three.

I guess that fourth day would have been when Claire McCaskill spoke. Because now she's not coming.

Supposedly this is her standard practice in years in which she's seeking election. She did skip the 2004 election (but then, Missouri voted for Bush, and she might have had similar concerns about the haughty liberal senator from Massachusetts).

Exit question: How many convention cancellations does this make? McCaskill, Manchin, Tester, Matheson, Tomblin, Rahall, Critz — who else? Good lord. No wonder they’re moving to a smaller venue. At this rate, Obama, Biden, and OWS will be the only ones there.

Update: Dan McLaughlin: “If this many in his party were bailing on attending the convention of an incumbent GOP POTUS, media would spin it as sign of his extremism.”

Fantastic point. If Obama can't hold his coalition -- if he's getting cancellations and people distancing himself from him -- doesn't that mean he's too liberal, too extreme, for the Democratic Party, and for the voters generally?

But no. The "extremist" label can only be applied to the GOP. It's in the Media Narrative Stylebook.

Posted by: Ace at 12:30 PM | Comments (362)
Post contains 330 words, total size 2 kb.

Hunh.

Solid.

Pundits love to use that word...I do not think it means what they think it means.

Obama will carry Oregon this cycle. But with even PPP only mustering an 8 point lead amongst registered voters today (dropping from their last poll and halving Obama's 08 lead) and coming on the heels of the Survey USA poll showing it a four point race amongst likely voters...and with that delicious 52-30 lead amongst independents Romney is enjoying there per our Democratic friends at Public Policy Polling...

Go big, I say. Or go home. Bonus beneath. more...

Posted by: CAC at 12:02 PM | Comments (161)
Post contains 103 words, total size 1 kb.

A commenter mentioned this meme being pushed, which I hadn't heard before. I said if they were trying that, it was stupid and desperate.

They are trying it,though (link to Breitbart, with an excerpt). Full Time article here if you want to give them your business.

Mitt Romney
One-Note Mitt: Is Romney Too Focused on the Economy?
By Michael Crowley | @CrowleyTIME | June 25, 2012 | +

However the Supreme Court rules on Barack Obama’s health care law this week, it’s still the economy that will likely determine the president’s fate—or so Mitt Romney’s campaign says. The presumptive Republican nominee’s advisers call the election “a referendum on Obama’s handling of the economy.” With almost comical discipline, Romney steers virtually every topic back to Obama’s economic record. In a speech to Latino leaders last week, for instance, Romney dodged some key immigration policy questions while harping on Obama’s failure to create more jobs: “Is the America of 11% Hispanic unemployment the America of our dreams?” he asked. “Why would you talk about anything else,” one prominent Republican recently asked NBC News. And perhaps it’s as simple as that.

But what if it’s more complicated than that? Two recent presidential elections are remembered primarily as referendums on an ailing economy that cost an incumbent his job–Ronald Reagan’s 1980 defeat of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton’s win over George H.W. Bush in 1992. But while we remember the defining slogans, “Are you better off than you were four years ago?” and “It’s the economy, stupid,” both those contests were more complicated in ways that should give Barack Obama some comfort.

You know what I'm in the mood for? A nice tall glass of Even Reagan Wasn't As Stupid or Single-Dimensional As This Charlatan.

[R]eagan’s campaign wasn’t singularly focused on Carter’s economic record. Reagan extensively blasted Carter on foreign policy (including the Iran hostage crisis and alleged weakness against the Soviets in Afghanistan and elsewhere). He depicted the President as wimpy in general, proclaiming that “There is a leadership crisis in America.” And he peddled a vigorous anti-Washington message (“Get the government off our backs”) that fired up both Goldwater conservatives and blue-collar Democrats.

Ah, thank you. That hit the spot.

Part of this is attempting to pressure Romney to stop playing his high cards and play his middling cards instead. As a wise man once said about taking advice from your enemies: "Don't."

But the other part of this is just Kool-Aid drinking. They want to convince themselves that Obama's in the catbird seat -- partisans always want to gin up other partisans with enthusiasm, of course -- so a lot of the article is just for liberals, telling them, for the millionth time, that supposedly Obama has this huge edge on likability and that's what will swing an election as an economic depression engulfs us again.

I've noted this before, but will say so again: When people settle on a candidate -- which hasn't yet happened for 8-10% of voters -- they begin saying the candidate they prefer is superior in all ways. For example, when Obama was winning in 2008, polls said people thought he was better on health care, understanding the problems of ordinary people, and other such Democratic stuff.

But they also claimed he was better on terrorism, taxes, and the deficit.

This is makes no sense, until you realize that people who barely care about politics also do not care much for parsing between different secondary questions. Once they've answered the primary question -- who do I support? -- this block of voters simply answers all other secondary questions the same way.

Romney will win this election, and when he does, his likability will be higher than Obama's. Because when the swing block swings, they'll just say Romney is better in all ways.

Posted by: Ace at 11:40 AM | Comments (189)
Post contains 662 words, total size 4 kb.

Only 20%? They say they still stick to their prediction that a slow, weak recovery is the most likely scenario.

Meanwhile, at Gallup and Rasmussen, consumer confidence falls.

Let me admit to my own cocooning: I was surprised when I saw those graphs that the consumer confidence numbers were as high as they were. Still in negative territory, but not nearly as negative as they'd been in 2011. And, until recently, you can see the trendline marching upwards, if slowly.

That's a good example of me blinding myself to contrary data points. I have been frustrated in my failure to understand why Obama's approval ratings were as high as they were; well, part of that frustration is self-inflicted. I didn't buy the "recovery" meme, but I also blinded myself to the fact that most of the country seemed to buy it. At least, they bought it some.

On the other hand, my cocooning is at least not unique. Analysts and media keep having to note "unexpected" drops in hiring and growth because they never seemed to take into account the significant downside risks in this false recovery, either.

I'll try to keep that in mind -- about cocooning myself -- but, honestly, I'll probably forget before the next post.

And all that said -- public opinion and actual economic data seem to be falling to the level of my cocoon.

BTW: Britain's been in a double-dip since the beginning of the year. Europe as a whole is as well.

Flashback:

And... Well, people are catching up to me, anyway. Charlie Cook says this is going to be a hard election for Obama to win.

ItÂ’s also pretty clear that, despite a ray of sunshine earlier this year, the economy isnÂ’t looking as bright today as it did in February and March. The global economic picture is depressing, with even the previously shining lights such as China, India, and Brazil experiencing slowdowns. The eurozone is in a recession that looks more deep than mild, and its sovereign-debt and banking crises are getting worse, not better. Domestically, there is cause for far more concern than would have been warranted at the beginning of this year. While the painful deleveraging process always dictated a slow recovery, economists are scrambling to revise their forecasts of economic growth to reflect the downward trend. The most frequently quoted number for gross domestic product is now 2 percent growth. Not that long ago, some forecasts had approached 3 percent. Unemployment is not expected to improve between now and the election. No incumbent wants to see an unemployment rate at 8 percent or higher. Franklin D. Roosevelt was the last to survive it in the Oval Office.

Of course, the economy was in a recession when Obama took the oath of office and worsened before he could possibly have done anything to turn it around. But itÂ’s equally true that every month a president is in office, he takes on a little more ownership of the situation he inherited, whatever it is. By the time the incumbent gets four years in, if things are getting better, he will get credit or the blame, deserved or not. Reminders that it all went to hell on a different president and partyÂ’s watch doesnÂ’t change that.

If the economy is much different in October and November than now, itÂ’s more likely to be worse than better....

We are past the point where Obama can win a referendum election, regardless of whether it is on him or the economy.

His prescription for Obama is to go negative and poison Romney's image. It's the only play left to him.

Posted by: Ace at 10:40 AM | Comments (236)
Post contains 620 words, total size 4 kb.

Despite being posted to a nine-day old post -- a dead thread -- and only up for 8 minutes before Patterico deleted it, somehow Brett Kimberlin managed to get a screenshot of it, and filed it in court as one of the many "threats" being "incited" against him.

Posted by: Ace at 10:24 AM | Comments (57)
Post contains 60 words, total size 1 kb.