TrogloPundit's a Danica Patrick Hog!

Troglo's pushing back against those allegedly shoehorning on his "Danicalanches." Gator Doug's a prime suspect: "Danica Patrick, NASCAR, and Hits." And Steve's going right for the gut: "Danica Patrick Nude." Sheesh, it's hard out there!

See also Blazing Cat Fur, "Pin Up Wars! ... The Final Battle - It wasn't a Good War! ... It was a Great War!"

Related: From Snark and Boobs, "Good News! Cleavage for Naughty Man Bits!" (via Dan Collins on Twitter).

Amy Bishop Charged With Murder in Huntsville University Shooting

My post last night on Amy Bishop struck a nerve. You can see Femme Patriot's awesome tweet below, and Free Republic's got a running comment thread on it.

Memeorandum has the New York Times report, but see the Huntsville Times, "Amy Bishop Charged With Murder in UAH Shooting":

UAH professor Dr. Amy Bishop has been charged with murder in connection with a deadly shooting that killed three people and injured three more Friday afternoon.

Huntsville police chief said Bishop was charged Saturday morning on three counts of capital murder in the first degree and three counts of assault in the first degree.

The Blog Prof has lots more, "Going Professorial? Alabama Biology Professor Goes on Shooting Rampage Killing 3 After Being Denied Tenure." But see also James Joyner, "Amy Bishop, UAH Prof, Kills Three After Denied Tenure" (emphasis added):

It’s always baffling to me when people try to politicize random tragedies — usually while they’re breaking news stories with little real information. At first blush, Bishop would seem to be extremely bright — a Harvard-trained neuroscientist doing cutting edge work — but with some serious psychological issues. My natural tendency in these mass murder situations is to write the shooters off as mentally ill but the seeming premeditation and obvious revenge motives against the victims would seem contrary evidence.

Lindsey Jacobellis: Least Clutch Athlete Ever?

One video clip asks if Lindsey Jacobellis is the "least clutch athlete ever"?

Although she's got huge Visa sponsorship this year, she pretty much set the "least clutch" bar 2006:

The debate is discussed here: "Lindsey Jacobellis' Silver Lining."

'In Order to Gain Domestic Power'

Stop what you are doing. Take a few moments. A brilliant film. I wish I had a little video robot that I could activate in the face of every America-bashing Democrat spouting the 'Bush lied' meme. But more importantly, this video reminds us that we are at war within. Our enemies aren't solely situated around the world's networks of jihad and in the rogue states in global totalitarianism. We have an murderous enabling class right here at home. It's why people of goodness are rejecting the left's party of defeat, the Democratic Party:

Via Doug Ross and IOWNTHEWORLD.

Amy Bishop, Detained in Huntsville University Faculty Murders, is Harvard-Trained Left-Wing Professor

The main story's at the Huntsville Times, "University of Alabama in Huntsville Biology Professor in Custody Regarding Deadly Shooting at Faculty Meeting."

But AOSHQ has a report, "Three Dead at University of Alabama at Huntsville as Woman Denied Tenure Opens Fire." And FWIW, here's this from Professor Bishop's RateMyProfessors page:

Neuroscience essentially turns into a bioethics class. She's a liberal from "Hahvahd" and let's you know exactly how she feels about particular subjects ...

And from Confederate Yankee, "Professor Snaps, Kills Faculty When Denied Tenure":

What sickens me the most is that according to the story, the Harvard-educated shooter, Amy Bishop, obviously suspected that she was going to be denied tenure, and brought the gun into the meeting to kill those peers who told her she wasn't as good as she thought. Pathetic.

More details at Fox News, "3 Dead in Shooting at University of Alabama Campus." See also, Memeorandum.

Nodar Kumaritashvili, Georgian Luge Slider, Dies in Olympics Training Run

From the Blog Prof, "Video: Olympic Luger Loses Control, Dies at First Day of Olympics":

The Huffington Post has photos..

See also, AFP, "Changes Needed at Death Track, Says Designer."

Added: A slow-motion clip from ABC News, "Georgian Luger Flies Off Track, Into Steel Pole and Dies Before Olympics Start: Nodar Kumaritashvili's Training Partner Says Luger Made 'Mistake' Before Crash." Nodar flew backwards head-first into the pole:

Jefferson Starship to Play Grove of Anaheim

Jefferson Starship will play The Grove Theater in Anaheim, April 29th. Grace Slick retired in 1988. She looks fabulous here, on the Smothers Brothers:

United States Children of Heroes Choir

I had lunch with my wife in San Clemente today. After that I went shopping at the nearby Walmart store. As I was leaving, I met John Wright, the founder of the U.S. Children of Heroes Choir. I loved his table and patriotic pictures and flags. I made a contribution and we talked for a little while, exchanging business cards. I'm going to try to get John to turn out for some local tea parties. His homepage is here: United States Children of Heroes Choir, "To provide for the children of our fallen heroes and the children of those troops so badly injured that they can no longer support their families."

Classy: Mark Thiessen on 'Morning Joe'

The video's at Story Balloon, "Lawrence O’Donnell’s Nutty Meltdown On Mark Thiessen During Morning Joe." Marc Thiessen's calm, cool, and classy.

And from Ed Morrissey:

Anyone who recalls Lawrence O’Donnell’s meltdown with John O’Neill over the latter’s opposition to John Kerry in 2004 won’t be surprised at O’Donnell’s inability to behave himself with Marc Thiessen on today’s Morning Joe. O’Donnell accuses Thiessen of personally conducting terrorism himself and wouldn’t stop shouting, until finally Joe Scarborough took the unusual step of stopping the segment and announcing that he would continue the interview … “by myself.”

RTWT.

Conspiracy of Fear: The Left's Program to Destroy the Tea Parties

I wrote yesterday about the "black 'copter tea party" meme, which is the latest MSM/netroots initiative to discredit and marginalize the tea party movement. In the wake of Scott Brown's election in Massachusetts (where grassroots activists and tea party tweeps helped propel Brown's campaign to victory) you might have noticed the ratcheted effort on the left to demonize and destroy the tea parties. This week's renewed debate over Sarah Palin and the right's crazy "birthers" is just the lastest manifestation. But note that beneath the left's condescension, there's a real fear that the resurgent right will make an earthquake comeback in November, with a likely Republican recapture of one or both chambers of the Congress. This scenario could very well destroy the Obama administration's policy agenda, not to mention Democratic prospects in 2012.

I'm thinking about this after finding this Jennifer Rubin essay, "Fox Uncovers Anti-Tea-Party Slush-Fund Scam" (via TigerHawk and Instapundit). Jennifer cites a Fox News report, "Anti-Tea Party Web Site Part of Scheme to Funnel Funds." And she notes:

Fox has the list of donors, which comprises a set of interlocking slush-type funds that pay for the anti–Tea Party campaign. The largest of these is the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME,) which has kicked in a total of $9.9M in a single year to two funds that provide the cash for the non-grassroots movement. Yes — government workers’ money is being used to fend off Tea Party protesters.

It seems that the Tea Party movement, once defamed and derided, now poses a threat to the liberal establishment, so much so that they are collecting millions to undermine it. Conservatives shouldn’t object to political speech — which this is. But there is certainly grounds to object to the chicanery, the lack of transparency, and the pretense that the opponents of the Tea Parties are themselves grassroots activists. They aren’t — this is Big Labor and assorted liberal-interest groups once again doing the bidding of the Democratic party. And if not for Fox, no one would be any the wiser.

It's the left's own conspiracy, actually, and it's a big one.

One little correction to Jennifer's post, however: Actually, Jim Hoft reported previously on organized labor's initiatives to kill the tea parties. See, "Confirmed: “Tea Party Is Over” Website Is Funded By SEIU." Jim is relying on Lee Doren's investigative research. And I posted on this previously myself: "SEIU Tied to 'Tea Party is Over' Smear Outfit."

But Jennifer's right about Fox News. No other outlets are touching this stuff. It's way too damaging to the secretive cabals that prop up the Obamedia Industrial Complex.

Video Hat Tip: "Too Late to Apologize: A Declaration" (via Sisterhood of the Mommy Patriots). Click "captions" at the YouTube, lower right, for the lyrics.

Patrick Kennedy, Ending an Era, Won't Seek Re-Election

William Jacobson's all over this story, here, here, and here.

But see also Chris Cillizza, "Patrick Kennedy Won't Run for Re-Election":

Rhode Island Democratic Rep. Patrick Kennedy will retire after eight terms in office, bringing an end to his House career just months after his father, legendary Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy, passed away.

"My father instilled in me a deep commitment to public service," Kennedy said in a video announcing his retirement. "Now having spent two decades in politics, my life has taken a new direction and I will not be a candidate for re-election this year."

Kennedy has easily held Rhode Island's 1st district since 1994 despite the occasional attempt by Republicans to knock him off.

Kennedy's time in Congress was decidedly uneven. He was rumored to be planning a Senate bid in 2000 but decided against running. He was tasked with chairing the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in that same cycle with expectations within the party that they would seize back control of the House. It didn't happen.

After his stint at the DCCC, Kennedy took on a far less high-profile role in Congress -- emerging only infrequently and not always in the best light. In the spring of 2006 Kennedy crashed his car into a police barricade near Capitol Hill; he entered rehab for addiction and depression days later. Over the summer, Kennedy admitted himself to a rehabilitation facility again.

Patrick Kennedy's retirement means that for the first time in nearly five decades there will not be a member of the Kennedy family in Congress. His father, who served Massachusetts in the Senate for more than four decades, died on August 25.

Check Cillizza's post for additional links, and no doubt William will have updates at Legal Insurrection.

Polling the Rightroots; or, Hey, I'm a Lot Like Those Other Conservative Bloggers!

How about the wisdom of the crowds? Er, conservative blogging crowds, that is?

John Hawkins has a super cool post, and one that took quite a bit of work to compile: "Polling Conservative Bloggers On Gay Marriage, Impeachment, Birtherism, Secession, And Health Care":

... Right Wing News emailed more than 250 right-of-center bloggers and asked them to answer nine questions that were copied from the Kos/Research 2000 poll and one bonus question about health care.

The following 79 blogs responded.

101 Dead Armadillos, Ace of Spades HQ, All American Blogger, All That Is Necessary, The American Princess, The Anchoress, And Rightly So, The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler, Argghhhh!, Axis of Right, Bad Example, Basil's Blog, Black and Right, Bookworm Room, Bright & Early, Bull Moose Strikes Back, Cao's Blog, Confederate Yankee, Copious Dissent, Dodgeblogium, Doubleplusundead, Drumwaster's Rants, Election Projection, Cara Ellison, Exurban League, Fausta's Blog, Cassy Fiano, Flopping Aces, Fraters Libertas, Freeman Hunt, GayPatriot, Generation Patriot, GOPUSA Northeast, GraniteGrok, Guardian Watchblog, Paul Ibrahim.com/, IMAO, Infidels Are Cool, JammieWearingFool, The Jawa Report, Linkiest, Little Miss Attila, Mean Ol' Meany , Moonbattery, Midnight Blue, mountaineer musings, Mount Virtus, No Oil For Pacifists, No Runny Eggs, Outside The Beltway, The Nose On Your Face (Buckley), The Nose On Your Face (Potfry), Pal2pal, The Pink Flamingo Bar & Grill, Pirate's Cove, Pirates Man Your Women!, QandO, Right Wing Rocker, Right View from the Left Coast, Russ. Just Russ, Say Anything, Don Singleton, Sister Toldjah, The Smallest Minority, Snark and Boobs, Solomonia, Stolen Thunder, The Sundries Shack, Don Surber, This Ain't Hell, The TrogloPundit, Twenty Mule Team, Viewpoint, Wolking's World, Word Around the Net, YidwithLid.

Here are the findings on gay rights, which track perfectly with my positions:

4) Should openly gay men and women be allowed to serve in the military?

Yes: 53% (41 votes)
No: 47% (37 votes)

5) Should same sex couples be allowed to marry?

Yes: 24% (19 votes)
No: 76% (60 votes)

Be sure to read the whole thing. The sample of respondents (linked above) is not representative of the GOP base (as John points out), but they're fair and thoughtful by a look at these results, and they don't go in for wild conspiracy theories.

Something to keep in mind when comparing right bloggers to the crazed denizens of the netroots left.

Sarah Palin's Beer-Track Populism

This piece at Media Matters is a good representation of the current state of Palin Derangement Syndrome.

But Sarah Palin's prospects look brighter than ever, from where I'm sitting, and to that effect, Ronald Brownstein pretty much nails it in his piece this morning, "Palin's Beer-Track Populism":

As a potential general election candidate in 2012, Palin still faces enormous liabilities. Independents and Democrats remain extremely cool to her. And she hasn't dented persistent doubts about her qualifications. In the 2008 exit poll, three-fifths of voters said that she was not qualified to serve as president. When Gallup reprised the question last November, 62 percent of Americans again described her as unqualified.

But as a Republican presidential primary candidate, Palin would have formidable advantages, beginning with a passionate base and an unrivaled allure for the cameras. In that same Gallup survey, nearly two-thirds of Republicans said they would seriously consider voting for her in 2012, the same proportion that Romney received. Palin's assets in 2012 might also include the continuing demographic evolution of the GOP electorate. Just as Obama's victory over Clinton highlighted the growing influence of upscale white-collar Democrats within their party, a Palin candidacy could crystallize (and benefit from) the GOP's growing reliance on blue-collar whites who once anchored the Democratic coalition. In an underappreciated milestone for a party long considered the home of the swells, voters without a college degree cast 51 percent of the ballots in the 2008 GOP primaries, according to the cumulative analysis. The shop floor trumped the corner office.

If Palin runs, she will likely rely more on those blue-collar voters than on wine-track Republicans. In Gallup's November poll, approximately two-thirds of noncollege white Republicans said they would seriously consider her, almost exactly the same share as Romney. But notably more college-educated Republicans said they would consider Romney (72 percent) than Palin (61 percent). Even more telling, far more college-educated white Republicans considered Romney qualified for the presidency (83 percent) than said the same about Palin (just 58 percent).

Against this backdrop, some of Palin's sharpest lines from last weekend could take on a different spin. In her "tea party" speech in Nashville and appearance on Fox News Sunday (where else?), she not only derided Obama as an ineffectual, unmanly "professor of law" but also challenged the very idea of expertise as the basis for governing. "I'm never going to pretend like I know more than the next person," she insisted on Fox. "I'm not going to pretend to be an elitist."

Palin's elevation of the instinctive wisdom of heartland Americans over the rarefied knowledge of egghead elites echoed conservative arguments against Democrats dating back to Adlai Stevenson and the 1950s. But it's easy to imagine Palin trying to consolidate beer-track Republicans by directing the same attacks against Romney -- a wealthy and modulated former management consultant who radiates expertise from his crisply starched shirts to his imperturbable hair. "It does set up a fascinating contrast," says GOP consultant Michael DuHaime, McCain's 2008 political director.

One lesson from Nashville is that if Palin ever takes the leap from celebrity to presidential candidate, the populist guns that conservatives have aimed against Democrats for decades could be loudly brandished inside the Republican tent.

VIDEO HAT TIP: Vets for Sarah.

The Left Exposed at Pajamas Media

That's Andrew Klavan:

But don't miss Sonja Schmid's, "The Obama Prompter: Perfect for Any Occasion!"

Tea Party Express: 'Just Vote Them Out!'

From Lynn Mitchell:

RELATED: From The Economist, "Scenes from a counter-revolution: The growing power of the tea-party movement will make it hard for Republican politicians to compromise with the president." (Via Memeorandum.) Also Blogging: Barcepundit and TigerHawk.

Why NOBODY is Reading the NY Times Anymore!

Here's the Memeorandum screenshot of last night's New York Times poll:

And once again, Ken Davenport nails it in the comments:

My God -- it doesn't take more than this article to see why NOBODY is reading the NY Times anymore! This is the most biased analysis of a poll I have ever seen -- and that's saying a lot given the state of the national media these days. This is spin in the worst way -- and reflects the total willful ignorance of the left on how far they've run afoul of the American public. How pathetic! Proves again that the NY Times motto has gone from "All the news that's fit to print" to "All the news that fits, we print"!!

Also, Dalia Sussman's a teeny bit more objective at "New Poll Shows Support for Repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’."

9/11 Photos Released

The images are here, "Newly Released Aerial Photos Taken After the Terror Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001":

And at ABC News, "World Trade Center 9/11 Photos: A Fresh But Painful Look at Sept. 11 Tragedy: Newly Released Sept. 11 Photos Offer New Perspective on Attacks":

Americans Want Government to Do Less, Poll Finds

Adam Nagourney's might as well be on another planet as far as his discussion of the latest New York Times poll goes. The summary is trying to pitch the poll results as a "battle" for public support, but it doesn't take a statistician to understand that these numbers are disastrous for the administration and the Democrats.

The main article is "Poll Finds Edge for Obama Over G.O.P. Among the Public." But check the raw survey itself, "New York Times/CBS News Poll: An Edge in the Battle for Public Support." On page 14 of the survey, 56 percent indicate they'd like to have a "smaller government providing fewer services," and below that we find a huge majority of almost 6 in 10 saying "government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals":

Also, more than twice as many people say that jobs and the economy are more important issues than healthcare (59 percent/27 percent). And the public prefers the Republican Party to the Democrats in terms of which party is "more likely to ensure a strong economy" (42 percent/37 percent). And 53 percent disagreed that the president "has offered reasonable solutions to the economic problems you and your family are facing."

And while Nagourney focuses on who deserves the bigger blame for the budget deficits, the survey finds that just 22 percent of Americans consider themselves "liberal" (compared to 35 percent who consider themselves conservative). There's a tremendous degree of populist anger at the poll, directed at big institutions and big government, and both parties have much to worry about in the heavy anti-incumbent sentiment identified. But come November, it's the party in power that'll be punished, and it's clear from this poll and others that the GOP is looking well positioned to make substantial gains in the Congress. It's definitely going to be an earthquake election on the scale of 1994. The administration has every reason to worry about its prospects. If it can't get more favorable approval on economic conditions and confidence in economic management, the Dems will face a monstrously disastrous blowout come November.

Bill Clinton's Health

An interesting discussion with Dr. Sanjay Jupta (whom I respect) on Bill Clinton's health and heart procedure today:

See also, "Bill Clinton Undergoes a New Heart Procedure" (via Memeorandum).

And Michelle discusses Boston Scientific, which makes the stent's used in Clinton's procedures, and the company's opposition to the Democrats’ proposed massive taxes on medical device manufacturers.

On Civic Learning and Liberal Universities

This is Richard Brake at the Intercollegiate Studies Institute:

Part 2 is here.

Listening to the nature of the survey, I'm not sure if I'm convinced if college instruction is the most important factor that results in students becoming more liberal -- i.e., I'm not sure if this research design is effective in assessing changes over time. It's not a panel study. Dr. Brake discusses survey controls for other influences on opinion, etc., and the poll's based on a representative sample. The study isolates those with college and those without, holding constant other factors, such as levels of civic knowlege (multivariate regression methods are used ...). The study finds those with college training to be more liberal on particularly polarizing issues. I'd still like to see this supplemented with some kind of data on changes through an individual's life cycle (a long-term panel-cohort analysis). Nevertheless, it's a well done initial cut for what they're tying to measure. The summary's at the Civic Literacy homepage, "The Shaping of the American Mind: The Diverging Influences of the College Degree & Civic Learning on American Beliefs." From the summary:

Earning a bachelor’s degree exerts an independent, statistically significant influence on a person’s views on five of the thirty-nine survey propositions, most involving a narrow range of polarizing social and cultural issues. If two people otherwise share the same background characteristics, as well as equal civic knowledge, the one who graduates from college will be more likely than the one who does not to:

•Favor same same-sex marriage; and
•Favor abortion on demand.

Similarly, a college graduate will be less likely than a non-college graduate to:

•Believe anyone can succeed in America with hard work and perseverance; •Favor teacher-led prayer in public schools; and
•Believe the Bible is the Word of God.

The 'Sexualization' of Ski Champion Lindsey Vonn

I'd never heard of U.S. skier Lindsey Vonn before last weekend, when I read about her at the Los Angeles Times: "Interactive graphic: Alpine skier Lindsey Vonn."

It turns out she's quite attractive, and some folks are taking issue with her recent cover photo on Sports Illustrated:

Over the last 60 years researchers have shown that about 4% of all SI covers have portrayed women.

When females are featured on the cover of SI, they are more likely than not to be in sexualized poses and not in action–and the most recent Vonn cover is no exception.

Check the post for updates. The author's walking it back a bit, although I'm sure Scott Eric Kaufman's on the case!

Also, "Lindsey Vonn's Sports Illustrated cover shot skis into controversy."

Anyway, Vonn's got a shin injury, which might prevent her from competing. See, "More drama for oft-injured Vonn."

Black 'Copter Tea Parties?

This is the strangest new meme on the tea parties. Now leftists are arguing that it's all about conspiracies (and "racists"), for example, at Newsweek's, "Black Helicopters Over Nashville," and also at Daily Kos, "Reading 'The Movement'." The latter piece is taking issue with the New Yorker cover story a couple of weeks ago, "The Movement." I actually posted on the New Yorker piece. I thought it was reasonable (which came as a surprise). But Daily Kos takes issue with author Ben McGrath, making thinly-veiled allegations that the tea parties are a "racist" front for the "fanatical neo-fascist right."

Anyway, here's this from the Newsweek article (via Memeorandum):

The tea-party movement has no leader. But it does have a face: William Temple of Brunswick, Ga. For months, the amiable middle-aged activist has been criss-crossing America, appearing at tea-party events dressed in his trademark three-cornered hat and Revolutionary garb. When journalists interview him (which is often—his outfit draws them in like a magnet), he presents himself as a human bridge between the founders' era and our own. "We fought the British over a 3 percent tea tax. We might as well bring the British back," he told NPR during a recent protest outside the Capitol.

It's a charming act, which makes the tea-party movement seem no more unnerving than the people who spend their weekends reenacting the Civil War. But the 18th-century getups mask something disturbing. After I spent the weekend at the Tea Party National Convention in Nashville, Tenn., it has become clear to me that the movement is dominated by people whose vision of the government is conspiratorial and dangerously detached from reality. It's more John Birch than John Adams.

Like all populists, tea partiers are suspicious of power and influence, and anyone who wields them. Their villain list includes the big banks; bailed-out corporations; James Cameron, whose Avatar is seen as a veiled denunciation of the U.S. military; Republican Party institutional figures they feel ignored by, such as chairman Michael Steele; colleges and universities (the more prestigious, the more evil); TheWashington Post; Anderson Cooper; and even FOX News pundits, such as Bill O'Reilly, who have heaped scorn on the tea-party movement's more militant oddballs.

One of the most bizarre moments of the recent tea-party convention came when blogger Andrew Breitbart delivered a particularly vicious fulmination against the mainstream media, prompting everyone to get up, turn toward the media section at the back of the conference room, and scream, "USA! USA! USA!" But the tea partiers' well-documented obsession with President Obama has hardly been diffused by their knack for finding new enemies.

That is truly a bizarre description, especially with that smack at Andrew Breitbart. That guy has single-handedly done more to right the ship of journalism than anyone else in recent years. If folks were chanting "USA, USA", then more power to 'em. I wish I could've been there!

Joe Biden: Sarah Palin, Tea Parties Don't Represent a "Significant Portion of the Population'

Joe Biden on Larry King Live. Of course polls show that fully one-third of the American public identifies with the tea party movement:

'Objectification' Hypocrisy

I seem to really have hit a nerve with my post making extreme fun of Roy Edroso. Look, I'll be honest: I don't have the slightest problem posting images of Sports Illustrated cover models on my page. Doesn't bother me a bit. It's a free world, you know. And frankly, they're a helluva lot more wholesome than the floozies at the Village Voice's "Bikini Burlesque (NSFW). And shoot, if I were Roy, I'd be ashamed to be blogging at a magazine that posted stuff like that right next to each of my entries, much less some of these "Choice Cunts":

But apparently struck dumb by the return-fire ridicule, Roy was reduced to bleating a snippy comment at the post: "Don't like scantily-clad women, Don? Well, to each his own."

Well no, Roy, I obviously love "scantily-clad women," conservative women especially! What I don't like is your radical agenda, and your freaking gratuitous demonization campaigns. And what better way to ruthlessly mock you and your leftist cadres than to ridicule the extremist libertinism that adorns each and every one of your posts. Like I said at my entry, "This really was too good to pass up!"

And I guess it really was. Satan's sidekick T-Bogg jumped on it faster than Jane Hamsher's blackface on Joe Lieberman. And then, in another puerile effort at conservative excoriation, Little Scotty Eric Kaufman decided he'd have a go at it as well, with a post (almost-endlessly) entitled, "Just because he hates feminism and festoons his virtual office with photographs of naked women doesn't mean he makes female students uncomfortable."

A monument to childishness, it's on Twitter too:

I have nothing but contempt for miniscule academic mountebanks like Scotty Kaufman. This prick's an ugly little twerp, and I don't mean that figuratively. His post is yet another really shitty attempt at cutting snark, and it's so bad that even his own commenters dissed it. I will eschew substantive comments on what's posted therein, but readers are welcomed to have a look for themselves. What I can say is that Scott Eric Kaufman represents all that is genuinely wicked and destructive in university culture today. I scoff at whatever claims to moral rectitude this hate-pimp could possible make. This is a merchant of hate of the most despicable kind, although perhaps there's some humor in it that he's actually quite terrible at the trade. Indeed, so far it's been all falsehoods and fabrications, and so it is again. Indeed, this spindle of a man is obsessed with conservative academics, and he's made it his driving ambition to literally destroy them. And let me disabuse readers of Scotty's denials of his desire for my academic termination. Au contraire. That's exactly what he wants, like E.D. Kain before him. This is an agenda driven purely by desperation to purge the ideological other, plain and simple. It's really all he does. And in reading Little Scotty's tantrum at the comments, please keep in mind that there is absolutely nothing authoritative about him. His words, all distortions and lies, signify sound and fury, and little else. But keep flailing, I say. There is nothing better to illustrate the totalitarianism of the today's left than the self-supposed superiority of the politically-correct mind on display. And those denials of political disagreement are worth Olympic gold. Such hypocrisy, given the radical female exploitation at Village Voice (met with SEK's deafening silence), is breathtaking. In any case, this is truly priceless, on the evil "objectification" of a true-academic's babe-blogging:

It's not a trick, you lecherous fraud. You're a disgrace, not because I disagree with you politically, but because you're incapable of understanding that you're actively discouraging half of your students from ever being able to trust you because you want to post pictures of half-naked women on your blog.

I'm a teacher, one who's committed in a way you aren't, as is evidenced by the fact that you value your "freedom" to post pictures that play into the insecurities of half the student body over your responsibilities as a teacher. You've surveyed the field of available options, and chosen the abstraction that affords you titillation over the one that allows you to effectively reach more of your students.

You are, I repeat, a disgrace to the profession. You don't understand this, and I get that, but when you choose satisfying your libido in the company of strangers over fostering an environment in which all your students can safely invest in the rigors of your course, you have failed as a teacher. I'm not trying to get you fired. I'm not going to write anyone any letters, nor will I encourage anyone else to. But you deserve to be.

Pay Attention to the Senate

I've written about this fairly often.

Recall that lefists have been attacking the Senate's filibuster rule with increasing intensity in recent months. It turns out that eliminating the filibuster has been a goal of progressives for some time. Netroots radicals, eyeing the prospects of congressional power, were making the case for destroying the filibuster in 2008, and perhaps before that. Ezra Klein, as I've discussed here, has been on an anti-filibuster jihad for close to a year. And some of Matthew Yglesias' most extreme blogging has focused on GOP use of the filibuster. Folks like this get attention at the top levels of policy, unfortunately. UCLA Political Scientist Barbara Sinclair was sucking up to Ezra Klein's agenda in her WaPo interview last month, and Klein's been known to brag about his White House connections. I have no idea who reads Yglesias, but the creep's got a big following of airheaded trolls at his blog; and he's working for the Center for American Progress, a Soros-back unit headed-up by former Bill Clinton Chief of Staff John Podesta (who also worked on President Obama's transition). So Yglesias probably gets some Beltway traction

Anyway, I mention all of this in light of some of the news out this week. At yesterday's Huffington Post we had this: "Progressives Call For Democrats To Abolish The Filibuster." And today: "Carl Levin: Filibuster Could Fall ‘After Massive Conflict On The Floor’." (Via Memeorandum.) And note this interesting comment at Firedoglake:

As Ben Eidelson notes, the Senate is by nature an undemocratic institution in that the representation is skewed toward small states, and sometimes a filibuster represents the votes of a majority of the US population. In fact, that happens most of the time – 64% – when Democrats are filibustering a Republican majority, and just 3% of the time when Republicans filibuster a Democratic majority. But this is not how we count votes in the US Senate, with each Senator getting the proportion of the vote of the population he or she represents. In a perfect world, a unicameral legislature would serve the nation well. But until that time, the 60-vote hurdle, now being trotted out for routine appointments, is too onerous for a democracy to function, particularly one with such unbalanced ideological rigidity from one party.

The discussion is prompted by the administration's nomination of radical labor hack Craig Becker to the NLRB. But previously, with Klein and Yglesias, etc., the outrage was over partisan immobility on ObamaCare legislation. And we'll be having lots more debate on "gridlock" now that Scott Brown is the GOP's 41st vote.

But really notice something here. Leftists are now excoriating Senator Brown for selling out his so-called "independent" credentials to "schlep" with the GOP majority. But Brown was ELECTED to office by the people of Massachusetts. The voters there sent Democrats and the administration a huge message: Quit wasting your time and get down to business on the country's problems. The progressive contingents, rejecting electoral trends starting from last November in New Jersey and Virginia, and now Massachusetts, have decided to push an even more authoritarian agenda. And as Chris Cillizza pointed out a couple of days ago, now President Obama has decided to turn filibuster reform into a campaign wedge against the Republicans in the fall. See, "White House Moves to Make the Flibuster a Campaign Issue."

This is actually one of the more significant debates for folks to monitor in the months going forward. I can't imagine any Republicans going along with Democratic efforts to abolish the filibuster in the Senate. But as leftists become increasing desperate to ram down their unpopular agenda on the American people, they'll be turning more and more to methods designed to overturn the principles of limited-government constitutionalism designed by the Framers. Note that it's not just abolishing the filibuster anymore. Radicals are talking about abolishing the Senate. James Madison must be turning in his grave, for this is precisely the tyranny of the majority about which he warned.

Orange County Storm

Nothing fancy, but I snapped this shot on the way home from work yesterday. I'm heading east on the 22 freeway. It's about 5:30pm. A few minutes earlier I noticed the sun had broken through the clouds. It was still raining ahead of me, and before long we had one of most brilliant rainbows I've seen in some time:

KABC-TV Los Angeles has a report:

More Brooklyn Decker!

Click on the image for the full size cover shot!

Also, more at the Huffington Post, "Brooklyn Decker SI Swimsuit Issue Cover PHOTO REVEALED (PICTURES, VIDEO)."

Bruce Hall is helping me figure out different photo-hosting systems.

This is the Blogger upload, which frankly, I hadn't even thought about using. I've had Photobucket going for so long I forgot about Blogger's own hosting. And frankly, I'm simply still learning how to do this, so I appreciate the help from readers. I do like posting the full size pictures to the blog, which the Blogger upload doesn't seem to be allowing. Any hints on how to do this with Blogger would be helpful.

And, as I mentioned earlier, Blazing Cat Fur's got his pin-up competition going, and he's even got Five Feet of Fury throwing some pics into the mix, and she is not fooling around! Check out: "The War of the Poses: Priscilla Wright."

Now that is giving Theo Spark a run for his money! And don't tell Cassandra!

And, how about checking out Bob Belvedere as well, who's already hip to the theme, "They Don’t Make ‘Em Like That Anymore: Nancy Crawford."

That said, I don't think Smitty at The Other McCain is down with the "War of the Poses" quite yet, although blame it on McCain if you need somebody to burn!

RELATED: The Classical Liberal, "Bloggers Rock!," and The Daley Gator, "Would I Post Jennifer Aniston Bikini Pics Just For Hits?"

Bad Education: 'Pleasures of Sex' for Kids

From Megyn Kelly's new show:

Seriously.

See the International Planned Parenthood Federation's homepage.

Leon Wieseltier on Andrew Sullivan's Anti-Semitism

It's been a while, but I wrote of Andrew Sullivan's anti-Semitism previously. See, "Andrew Sullivan: Anti-Semitic Neocon Derangement."

As good a case as I might make, it's nothing compared to Leon Wieseltier's utterly breathtaking decimation of Sully, "Something Much Darker" (via Memeorandum):

Consider some squibs that Sullivan recently posted on his blog. “Most American Jews, of course, retain a respect for learning, compassion for the other, and support for minorities (Jews, for example, are the ethnic group most sympathetic to gay rights),” he declared on January 13. “But the Goldfarb-Krauthammer wing–that celebrates and believes in government torture, endorses the pulverization of Gazans with glee, and wants to attack Iran–is something else. Something much darker.” Michael Goldfarb is the former online editor of The Weekly Standard, about whom the less said, the better. Charles Krauthammer is Charles Krauthammer. I was not aware that they comprise a “wing” of American Jewry, or that American Jewry has “wings.” What sets them apart from their more enlightened brethren is the unacceptability of their politics to Sullivan. That is his criterion for dividing the American Jewish community into good Jews and bad Jews–a practice with a sordid history.

As far as I can tell, Krauthammer’s position on torture is owed to a deep and sometimes frantic concern for American security, and his position on the war in Gaza to a deep and sometimes frantic concern for Israeli security, and his position on Iran to a deep and sometime frantic concern for American and Israeli security. Whatever the merits of his views, I do not see that his motives are despicable. Moreover, Krauthammer argues for his views; the premises of his analysis are coldly clear, and may be engaged analytically, and when necessary refuted. Unlike Sullivan, he does not present feelings as ideas. Most important, the grounds of Krauthammer’s opinions are no more to be found in, or reduced to, his Jewishness than the grounds of the contrary opinions–the contentions of dovish Jews who denounce torture, and oppose Israeli abuses in the Gaza war, and insist upon a diplomatic solution to the threat of an Iranian nuclear capability–are to be found in, or reduced to, their Jewishness. All these “wings” are fervent Jews and friends of Israel. There are many “Jewish” answers to these questions. We all want the Torah on our side. And the truth is that the Torah has almost nothing to do with it.

Sullivan is hunting for motives, not reasons; for conspiracies, which is the surest sign of a mind’s bankruptcy. These days the self-congratulatory motto above his blog is “Of No Party or Clique,” but in fact Sullivan belongs to the party of Mearsheimer and the clique of Walt (whom he cites frequently and deferentially), to the herd of fearless dissidents who proclaim in all seriousness, without in any way being haunted by the history of such an idea, that Jews control Washington. Sullivan might have a look at the domestic pressures–in lobbies and other forms–upon American diplomacy toward China, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Cuba, and give a thought or two to the elaborate and sometimes exasperating nature of foreign-policy-making in a democracy; but he prefers not to dive deep into the substance of anything. It is less immediately satisfying than cursing and linking. Does Sullivan think that Obama’s engagement with Iran–which, accurately described, is an engagement with the Iranian dictatorship and not with the Iranian people–is paying off? Does he believe that the Israeli war against Hamas was an unjust war, or that Israel should have continued to absorb Hamas’s rocket attacks–which were indisputably criminal–and not acted with force against them? His answers may be inferred from his various ejaculations–“the pulverization of Gazans,” for example, is a phrase that is calculatedly indifferent to the wrenching moral and strategic perplexities that are contained in the awful reality of asymmetrical warfare–but they are not so much answers as bar-room retorts; moody explosions of verbal violence; more invective from another American crank. Worst of all, the explanation that Sullivan adopts for almost everything that he does not like about America’s foreign policy, and America’s wars, and America’s role in the world–that it is all the result of the clandestine and cunningly organized power of a single and small ethnic group–has a provenance that should disgust all thinking people.

And this is not all that is disgusting about Sullivan’s approach. His assumption, in his outburst about “the Goldfarb-Krauthammer wing,” that every thought that a Jew thinks is a Jewish thought is an anti-Semitic assumption, and a rather classical one. Bigotry has always made representatives of individuals, and discerned the voice of the group in the voice of every one of its members. Is everything that every gay man says a gay statement? I will give an example. On October 15, 2001, when the ruins of the World Trade Center still smoldered, Sullivan published a piece in the Times of London called “A British View of the US Post-September 11.” In this piece he accused Bill Clinton of “appeasement,” and praised George W. Bush for assembling “the ideal team” for a “task” that “cannot be done by airpower alone,” and had kind words for America’s “world hegemony”–the politics changes, the fever remains the same–and also included this unforgettable sentence: “The decadent Left in its enclaves on the coasts is not dead – and may well mount what amounts to a fifth column.” A fifth column! It is a genuinely sinister sentence. I wish to emphasize two features of Sullivan’s comment. The first is that it is an exercise in demonization: it divides the American people into good Americans and bad Americans. The second is that it is in no way an expression of Sullivan’s homosexuality. It must never be said that when Sullivan lauded the bellicosity of Cheney and Rumsfeld–which wing of American Christianity, by the way, shall we blame for them? –he exchanged the company of the good gays for the company of the bad gays. To say that would be homophobic. Here is what such homophobia would look like: Most American homosexuals, of course, retain a respect for art, and compassion for the other, and support for minorities. But the Sullivan-Shmullivan wing of American homosexuality–that celebrates and believes in torture and war, and endorses the pulverization of Afghan villages with glee, and wants to attack any country where Al Qaeda may be found–is something else. Something much darker. Get it?

RTWT at the link.

Dan Riehl says the enormity is much more than anti-Semitism: "Sullivan is Actually Not An Anti-Semite." Brad DeLong, in a wide, winding path, comes to the same conclusion. And others on the left have circled the wagons.

But I'm with Wieseltier on this one. See also, Darleen Click, "Excitable Andy: ‘Watch out for the Jooooos!’."