The Anchoress notes the outrageous proposal itself, which I mentioned a day or two back, and then notes the FCC seems to be walking back its anti-First Amendment plan.

From AdWeek:

The Federal Communications Commission is quietly changing course on a controversial study after parts of the methodology were roundly criticized by GOP lawmakers and commissioner Ajit Pai for encroaching into editorial decisions and content at TV stations. . .Regardless of the studyÂ’s intent, itÂ’s hard to fathom why the FCC sent its minions into newsrooms of the stations it licenses and ask questions about how stations exercise their First Amendment right.

The Anchoress counts this as a victory for standing on principle.

We'll see, though. This will be back. It will just mutate into a new form. This is what they want. They will never stop wanting it.

Posted by: Ace at 01:28 PM | Comments (164)
Post contains 161 words, total size 1 kb.

What is the problem with electric cars, marketing-wise? (Let's put aside their technical problems, and the problem marketing a vehicle with technical problems.)

Well, for a lot of possible buyers, an electric car represents a buy-in to a specific mode of life that is alien to them -- granola-crunchy, limousine liberal, soft-headed and soft-handed, and suspiciously European in taste.

This is especially a problem for a Cadillac electric car, as (I'm just speculating here) the Cadillac brand seems to appeal to two groups:

1. Older, wealthier business-oriented buyers, who are probably conservative in culture and politics.

2. Rappers.

Well, this ad is designed to appeal to category 1.

So here's what Cadillac does: They pitch to that exact demographic by making fun of stuff that more conservative people make fun of, chiefly, the French.

They do not sell the car on the basis of environmental impact. They sell the car on the idea that you'll be teaching the French a lesson in How to Be a F***ing Man by buying a f***ing electric car.

It's a ridiculous, brazen effort to turn the electric car from being an effete progressive's Trader Joe Run puttermobile into a red-blooded American's middle finger to socialist decay, and yet... well, you be the judge. It's a good ad, let's just say that. I don't know if they could ever possibly sell this idea, but the ad is as good a shot at it as I can conceive.

The actor here will be familiar to most of you; he's Neal McDonough. He's in everything. He was one of Captain America's Howling Commandoes; he played psychotic blond hitman Robert Quarles in Justified a season or two back. (It didn't end well for him there.)

He famously refuses to do any sex scenes (or, I think, even use profanity) in his roles because he considers that part of his Catholic principles. (On the other hand, he plays psychotic villains a lot, and so he does all the violence and menacing stuff.)

So here's Cadillac attempting the impossible: Trying to convince conservatives that an electric car is kind of a conservative thing.

It's impossible, and yet, I applaud anyone who attempts the impossible. more...

Posted by: Ace at 10:05 AM | Comments (458)
Post contains 781 words, total size 5 kb.

Via JammieWF, the Free Beacon picked up this story from the Tampa Bay Something Something Newspaper.

The candidate is Alex Sink, a Congressional candidate for Florida's 13th District. CAC mentioned her in the podcast, but I think I was putting up that Temporary ONT when he was talking about her.

“We had this CBO report that predicted that the workforce would shrink as a result of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) as people chose to cut back on their working hours so they qualify for healthcare assistance. What was your reaction to this? Is that a devastating effect of Obamacare?” the interviewer asked her.

Sink cheerily responded: “Oh absolutely not…Actually it’s kind of an exciting prospect.”

It sure is. It sure is.

Do the voters agree this is all very exciting?

more...

Posted by: Ace at 09:25 AM | Comments (225)
Post contains 195 words, total size 2 kb.

Via @doreenhdixon, a funny compilation of animals "photobombing" pictures of people or other animals, that is to say, poking their heads into the shot despite not being the intended subject of the photo.

I'm not taking the day off; I just need my daily slumpbuster to end my daily writers block. And these are pretty funny.

@rdbrewer4 sends another one that that compilation missed:

Posted by: Ace at 08:25 AM | Comments (228)
Post contains 82 words, total size 1 kb.

Still no hard numbers but insurers are starting to talk and the numbers don't bode well for the system.

Fully one-fifth of the new enrollment numbers that HHS has been waving around are bogus. Their target for the end of January was 4.4 million sign-ups; a few days ago, they told the country theyÂ’d made it three-quarters of the way there with 3.3 million. In reality, once the deadbeats are bounced from the rolls by their new insurers, theyÂ’ll be in the ballpark of 2.6 million, or 60 percent of their target. And thatÂ’s after HHS pressured insurers to extend the payment deadline from December 31 into January, hoping that a little more time for slackers would pad the enrollment figures even more.

But even that 20% non-payment rate maybe low. Some insurers are saying the non-payment rate for their plans are 25% to 30% range.

Of course the answer to a failure of massive government is more government!

Now, some insurers and a pair of Senate Democrats are trying to change the law permanently so that individuals and small businesses can buy so-called copper plans. The plans likely would have lower premiums, but purchasers would pay more of their ordinary health costs upfront. Greater coverage would kick in for serious, unforeseen health episodes that would require, for example, a hospital stay.

Sens. Mark Begich of Alaska and Mark Warner of Virginia, both Democrats facing close re-election races this year, are sponsoring legislation that would allow people to buy copper plans on the exchanges. Moreover, insurance-industry officials have been talking up the idea with federal officials, though it is unclear whether the administration could make the change through regulations.

The White House said it was weighing the proposal. "The president remains open to all ideas that would genuinely improve the Affordable Care Act and appreciates the careful thought Mr. Begich has given to his legislation," an administration official said.

So what this amounts to is bringing back catastrophic plans. You know the ones the Democrats spent weeks calling "bad apple" and "junk" insurance.

Naturally the people that would be most drawn to these "low cost" programs would be the young invincibles that ObamaCare desperately needs to make this whole scheme work. So what happens if this passed and these young and healthy people start paying significantly less in premiums than the expected ammount to keep the whole thing afloat?

Yeah.

The interesting question is, if Harry Reid agreed to this would the GOP support it? On one hand, it would help people who are getting screwed with the worst of both worlds now, high premiums and high deductibles. But it would kill the GOP's "we oppose ObamaCare" talking point heading into the election. What would be the political cost to the GOP for not helping these people?

Both sides have to be looking at "reforming" ObamaCare as a dangerous political high-wire act. Democrats might be in trouble whether or not they act but at least acting would have the benefit of putting the GOP in a tough spot.

I bet Reid goes for this soon. Sure it will skew the long term viability of the program but that's a medium term issue. Keeping the Senate majority is a right now problem.

It'll be interesting to see what the GOP does if the ball is dropped into their court.

Most likely outcome? King Barack I will just decree these plans into existence. Because...shut up serf.

Posted by: DrewM at 08:02 AM | Comments (152)
Post contains 600 words, total size 4 kb.

Another Obamacare sucess story.

State health care exchange officials said they had thoroughly vetted Christa Ann McClure, the Connect for Health Colorado director they placed on paid administrative leave Tuesday after learning she had been indicted for stealing from her last employer.

McClure, 51, pleaded not guilty Feb. 6 in federal District Court in Montana to eight counts of theft and fraud from a nonprofit housing agency in Billings.

Don't worry though, your personal information is in the best of hands.

Posted by: Open Blogger at 05:02 AM | Comments (227)
Post contains 100 words, total size 1 kb.

Another Obamacaresucess story.

State health care exchange officials said they had thoroughly vetted Christa Ann McClure, the Connect for Health Colorado director they placed on paid administrative leave Tuesday after learning she had been indicted for stealing from her last employer.

McClure, 51, pleaded not guilty Feb. 6 in federal District Court in Montana to eight counts of theft and fraud from a nonprofit housing agency in Billings.

Don't worry though, your personal information is in the best of hands.

Posted by: Open Blogger at 05:02 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 96 words, total size 1 kb.

Happy Valentine's Day.

Rep. Stockman's absurd campaign against Sen. Cornyn brings the laughs:

If you're chilly tonight, huddle near John Cornyn's pants for warmth.

— Rep. Steve Stockman (@StockmanSenate) February 14, 2014

NRO's Charles C.W. Cooke is wondering why conservatives are insisting on doing the same thing that failed in October.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board is asking the same question, although it's more focused on Sen. Cruz's role in once again demanding a showdown that he has no plan to win.

The WSJ piece is right, but incomplete. Cruz knows he can demand a showdown even though he has no idea how to win one because (1) conservatives will eat that up, favoring intentions over results as they do currently; and (2) he isn't running for reelection this year.

A securities law expert says that Matt Bevin would have violated securities law if he signed the investor statement supporting the TARP bailout when he didn't really support the TARP bailout, as he now claims he didn't.

Valentine's cover: more...

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:53 AM | Comments (466)
Post contains 182 words, total size 2 kb.

You Could Be Here: Places in the US With the Most Pleasant Days per Year

Where a pleasant day is defined as one where the mean temperature is between 55 and 75 degrees.

Unsurprisingly Southern California comes out on top with 180+ pleasant days. The worst is central Montana which gets about 3 weeks of pleasant days every year.

I decided to take a stab at what constitutes a "pleasant" day and then aggregate NOAA data for the last 23 years to figure out the regions of the United States with the most (and least) pleasant days in a typical year. The results, I think, are not that surprising and pretty much affirm the answer given off the cuff by many of my west coast friends when asked about the best places, "Southern California?" For the areas with the least pleasant days, I admit I would have guessed North Dakota. However, it's much of Montana that gets an average of a couple of weeks of pleasantness each year.

The live chart is here. Darker blue means more pleasant days per year.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:41 PM | Comments (499)
Post contains 1727 words, total size 17 kb.

Yesterday I went on a Twitter rant (thatÂ’s what itÂ’s for, right?) against Mitch McConnellÂ’s debt ceiling shenanigans (the old, vote for cloture when you could stop it but against the bill on final passage when you canÂ’t trick).

HQ and personal favorite Charles C.W. Cooke replied to one of the tweets.

@DrewMTips This is a completely insane thing to say, Drew.

— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) February 13, 2014

He followed up by saying heÂ’d be writing more about it later.

And that he did in a piece entitled “In Praise of the Establishment”

Still, all of that notwithstanding, many conservatives have of late demonstrated a worrying tendency to believe that the virtue of their grievances and the legitimacy of their pursuits must automatically translate into political victory — and that if these do not, that this is the fault of the leadership of the Republican party. I appreciate that this is difficult for some to hear, but I would venture that the opposite is the case. In my estimation, the only thing of which Mitch McConnell and John Boehner have been guilty in the past few years is to have worked tirelessly within political reality and to have reacted sensitively to the hands that they were dealt. The hysterical epithets and acronyms, the witless talk of the amorphous “Establishment,” and the lucrative fundraising e-mails all to one side, there is little that either man could have done differently while their party controlled just one half of one branch of government.
Â…
“I’d be willing to risk losing the Senate if we could keep America,” Mitch McConnell’s primary challenger, Matt Bevin, told Glenn Beck this morning. What an astonishingly incoherent and misguided sentence that is. “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” asks the King James Bible. A fair question, yes, but politics is a different game altogether, and, in this case, the alternative isn’t an otherworldly victory or spiritual advancement but simply more loss. The question for Bevin must be “for what shall it profit a man if he shall lose another debt-ceiling fight and lose his party’s shot at the Senate as well?” And the answer is “not at all.” If this is what we are to expect from the revolution — a host of nihilistic, suicidal, performance artists who would rather be outside of the control room screaming than inside and in charge — then give me the cynical calculations of a Mitch McConnell any day of the week.

As an aside, why are people dumping on Ted Cruz for the debt ceiling vote? He didn't spend weeks saying the GOP would refuse to hike it without any strings attached. That's what McConnell, Boehner, Ryan and the rest of the "establishment" were saying. Why is Cruz the bad guy for trying to make them live up to their commitment? It seems rather strange to get mad at the guy who pointed out the lie rather than the liars.

IÂ’ve heard McConnell talk about having to take tough votes in the Senate (itÂ’s why they usually make terrible candidates for President) and he got bit by one this week. The reason it was a tough vote is because while complaining about the debt ceiling hike is popular, itÂ’s also necessary to raise it.

I will give McConnell begrudging credit that in its own way his vote for cloture a brave and unselfish.

With all of that said, I see absolutely nothing wrong with using this against McConnell. Being in the leadership has its perqs but it also has downsides. McConnell is a big boy and knows this.

On the initial question as to whether McConnell has a tactical or ideological difference with Obama on the debt ceiling IÂ’ll let McConnellÂ’s record speak for itself.

I looked back at the debt ceiling hikes during the Bush years (that’s as far back as I had time to check) and there were seven of them totaling $5.85 trillion in increases. Mitch McConnell voted for each and every one of them. Only in 2009 did he begin to vote against hiking the debt ceiling. I find it hard to believe that McConnell suddenly found a principled objection to ever increasing debt. It seems pretty clear his biggest problem with debt is that it’s now political expedient to be against it. Remember, then Senator Obama said hiking the debt ceiling “is a sign of leadership failure”.

Based on that, I think itÂ’s fair to say McConnell and Obama hold the same position on raising the debt ceiling. more...

Posted by: DrewM at 06:07 AM | Comments (818)
Post contains 1458 words, total size 10 kb.