Federal Investigation of Walter James Casper III Could Involve Civil Rights Abuses

For some reason, Walter James Casper III doesn't think I'm serious here. In response to my latest report, Casper continues to argue that nothing under the law prohibits him from his harassing contacts that I have repeatedly warned him not to make. See: "Update On Big Talking Harassment-Blogger Capt. Fogg of 'Human Voices'." I am not linking to his harassment blog or to Capt. Fogg's. But Casper is arguing that the federal anti-harassment law requires either the distribution of pornography or anonymous contacts. That is not true. Federal statute 47 U.S.C. 223 prohibits anonymous harassment on the Internet and general harassment with the intent to annoy. As one writer indicates:

Ok, let me put this in plain English for you, using the language of section 223 itself:

Anybody who uses the Internet to post or email any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication which is obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent, with the intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass another person has just committed a Federal crime, for which they can be imprisoned, fined, or both.

By this definition, Casper's repeated indecent and harassing contacts directed to me against my wishes constitute a federal crime --- and this is why I will continue to repudiate Casper's criminal activities, and why I will not be bullied into silence or intimidated into withdrawal. This is bigger than this one progressive's attacks. Why on earth does Casper insist that he has a right to comment at the blog against my wishes, and why especially does he believe that he has a right to email me with malicious and annoying comments?

The answer, of course, is that he's a progressive totalitarian. Progressives do not and will not tolerate difference, and that is what has been driving Casper since he became a troll stalker at this blog years ago. After I banned him he refused to stay away. And he and his allies have taken their malevolence to another level --- it's simply obscene what assholes like this think they can get away with and I refuse to be bullied. The man runs a hate blog pure and simple. I have reported him to the police. And as I noted by the officer, Casper's actions were indeed harassing and that such activities were possibly criminal actions under Section 653m of the California Penal Code. See my report: "California Penal Code Section 653m on Criminal Harassment With Intent to Annoy: Report on Unwanted Illegal Contacts by Fascist Hate-Blogger Walter James Casper III."

Now, since Casper has argued that he is not restrained by state law I have indicated I will take it to the federal level. I am researching my options under the law. If the harassment continues I will be speaking to my U.S. representative, and I'll contact federal law enforcement officials. I intend to show that Casper is harassing not only under Section 223 but that he may also be liable for federal civil rights violations. Casper's harassment could be driven by both ideological and racial bigotry. See the FBI's page, "Hate-fueled crimes are not just a thing of the past." Casper has a long history as attacking me as "halfrican' and he's also routinely made disparaging remarks against people of color, indicating, for example, that he judges people first by their racial and ethnic identities, which is a form of racial profiling. And top of that, I've long documented the racist hatred that's routinely spewed in the comments at Casper's harassment blog. It's a vile repository of hate. It's simply amazing that a radical leftist purportedly committed to racial equality could in fact be so filled with racial hatred as this. But again, progressives are totalitarian and I'm more than ready to use their racial rights regime to stop their own hate and intimidation.

So, all this is for the record. Walter James Casper III is on warning once again to stop the harassment. No one should be subject to that kind of hatred and campaigns of destruction simply for ideological disagreements. But these are progressives, so this is what they do by their essence. Leftists are freaks, dirtbags, and secular demons.

NOTE: Casper has commented here, earlier this morning. He is banned but for some reason feels he can act with impunity to comment and harass whenever he likes.

I'll update after I speak with the authorities. Comments are closed.

UPDATE: I have contacted my congressman's office and am waiting to hear back. This is the beginning of a federal investigation. I will also be notifying the Long Beach Police Department to get them into the loop, which will facilitate the inclusion of the congressional representative for the LBCC district. This is going to take some time and persistence, but that's what it takes to smack down the f-king progressive totalitarians.

NEVER CAVE TO THESE ASSHOLES.

Diamond Jubilee

At Telegraph UK, "Queen renews her dedication to the nation."

BONUS: Patt Morrison has a thoughtful commentary at the Los Angeles Times, "Queen Elizabeth II's diamond jubilee, and all that."

Sexy Fiat 500 Abarth Super Bowl Ad (VIDEO)

Well, at least it wasn't J. Lo.

Clint Eastwood: 'It's Halftime in America'

The U.S. bailed out Chrysler so this ad about halftime in America is deceptive. Most regular folks can't count on Big Brother to come to the rescue, as much as we love Clint Eastwood's grit and determination. It rings a little hollow in the end.

It went over pretty well, in any case. See CNN, "Chrysler is king of the Super Bowl spots."

And at Instapundit, "CLINT EASTWOOD LOSES RESPECT: “Would Dirty Harry ask for a handout?”"

New York Giants Defeat New England Patriots 21-17 in Super Bowl XLVI

The New York Times has the story, "Giants Beat Patriots in Final Rally."

And at Los Angeles Times, "Eli Manning rallies Giants to another Super Bowl victory":

Reporting from Indianapolis -- His brother built this house.

Eli Manning raised the roof.

The sleepy-eyed quarterback woke up the past Sunday by leading the New York Giants to a 21-17 victory over the New England Patriots in Super Bowl XLVI at Lucas Oil Stadium.

Manning was named the game's most valuable player, just as he was in February 2008.

It was the second time in four years Manning lifted the Giants over the Patriots on the NFL's grandest stage -- and the second championship ring for Manning, one more than his older brother, Peyton. The game was played in the stadium Peyton has called home.

The Lombardi Trophy is the fourth in five Super Bowls for the Giants, the first nine-win team in a 16-game schedule to win a Super Bowl and the first to weather a four-game losing streak in the process.

The winning touchdown was a six-yard run up the middle by Ahmad Bradshaw with 1:04 to play. By all appearances, the Patriots allowed him to score in order to get the ball back in the hands of Tom Brady for one more chance.

Bradshaw attempted to stop just short of the goal line so the Giants could use more of the clock, but his momentum carried him into the end zone.

Brady, who was going for his fourth ring in five tries, took possession with 57 seconds left, and got his team to midfield, but his Hail Mary heave on the final play fell incomplete.

The Giants' season was marked by their incredible resolve. They needed to win their finale against Dallas to get into the postseason. New York was the second team in NFL history to reach the Super Bowl by beating three opponents with better records, matching the feat of the 2008 Arizona Cardinals.

Continue reading.

Rare Truth-Telling Piece at L.A. Times Skewers Radical Left's Hypocrisy on Protecting the Environment

The development of a solar power plant in the Mojave will decimate large swaths of the desert --- all in the name of creating alternative energy sources and driven by global warming hysteria. Both the Bush and Obama administrations share the blame. Tens of billions of dollars have been made available for the development of non-fossil fuel burning energy sources, and the costs to the consumer will be substantially higher than that of traditional sources --- and that's to say nothing of the costs to taxpayers in the subsidies going to fund this boondoggle.

It's pretty messed up all around, but the inevitable result of a regulatory state that would make the old Soviet bureaucrats proud.

See, "Sacrificing the desert to save the Earth":

For decades, America's Western deserts have been dusty storehouses for government scrap, a lode for minerals, a staging ground for tanks and military maneuvers.

But the thrum of industry is afoot, bringing Space Age technology and a bustling sense of urgency.

The BrightSource solar plant stands as an exclamation point in the desert.

The $2-billion plant is an amalgam of gadgetry designed to wring the maximum energy from the sun. Computers continually focus the field of mirrors to a center tower filled with water, which will heat to more than 1,000 degrees. The resulting steam drives an array of turbines capable of generating 370 megawatts, enough to power roughly 140,000 homes during peak hours.

Capturing a free and clean source of energy is not cheap. Solar is the Cadillac of energy, with capital costs and other market factors making it three times more expensive than natural gas or coal.

Ratepayers' bills will be as much as 50% higher for renewable energy, according to an analysis from the consumer advocate branch of the state Public Utilities Commission.

What has opened the way for such a costly source of energy is the dramatic turn in federal policy. As early as 2005, the Bush administration established generous programs to reward renewable energy developers. The Obama administration sweetened the pot, offering $45 billion in federal tax credits, guaranteed loans and grants.

On the state level, former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger freed large solar plants from property tax and handed out $90 million in exemptions from sales and use taxes. Under Gov. Jerry Brown, the state invested more than $70 million in clean energy research last year, funded by a ratepayer surcharge.

The funding has sparked a land rush echoing the speculative booms in mining, railroad construction and oil and gas on Western federal land.

One of the first firms out of the gate was Oakland-based BrightSource Energy Inc., which received $1.6 billion in federally guaranteed loans in addition to hundreds of millions in private capital derived from such disparate sources as NRG Energy Inc., Google Inc., investment bank Morgan Stanley and CalSTRS, the state's teachers' retirement fund.

By taking advantage of the available government subsidies, shrewd solar developers can get taxpayers to cover close to 80% of a multibillion-dollar project. The rest comes from investors, attracted by what amounts to a tax shelter.

But other companies — often no more than a website and a phone number — obtained solar permits from the federal Bureau of Land Management with no apparent intention other than to sell their place in line. Some gobbled up permits, sat on the land and never turned a spade of soil.

Federal and state officials have used job creation to partly justify their subsidy of private solar companies. During the two to three years of a solar plant's construction, most new jobs will go to union tradesmen. But after a plant is built, employment opportunities are limited.

BrightSource's Ivanpah facility is expected to employ 1,000 workers at the height of construction, but that will shrink to 86 full-time maintenance and facility workers once it is up and running.

"What troubles me is that the public has bought the whole solar expansion hook, line and sinker because it's 'renewable,'" Schramm said. "The public would be up in arms if someone was building Disneyland next to a national park."

You gotta read it all.

Virtually the entire roster of the big environmental interest groups have been either silent or in on the planning. And here's this from the Times:

The Center for Biological Diversity, one of the nation's most aggressively litigious environmental groups, has not challenged the Ivanpah project. It signed a confidential agreement not to oppose the project in exchange for concessions for the desert tortoise — mandating that BrightSource buy land elsewhere for conservation.

Some 24 environmental groups signed statements largely supporting the aims of solar developers. National environmental groups joined BrightSource and other solar companies in a letter sent Dec. 14 to the White House, asking the president to continue a federal renewable-energy subsidy.

The national office of the Sierra Club has had to quash local chapters' opposition to some solar projects, sending out a 42-page directive making it clear that the club's national policy goals superseded the objections of a local group. Animosity bubbled over after a local Southern California chapter was told to refrain from opposing solar projects.

Look, that's lockstep compliance with the global warming program or else. Who cares about the desert's biodiversity, right? The maw of the bureaucratic climate change industry destroys everything in its path, from desert wildlife to recalcitrant opponents.

That's totalitarian.

Sunday Cartoons

At Flopping Aces, "Sunday Funnies."

Also at Reaganite Republican, "Reaganite's Sunday Funnies," and Theo Spark, "Cartoon Round Up..."

Newt's Bad Night

I called him a sore loser, and Jonathan Tobin elaborated the point.

Now here's Victor Davis Hanson, "Gingrich’s Speech — How to Make a Bad Night Worse" (via Memeorandum):

Gingrich should carefully play a tape of his post–Nevada caucus performance, and then he would quickly grasp that it was little more than a litany of excuses, whining, and accusations — characterized by stream-of-conscious confessionals and rambling repetitions. And, I think, will hurt him more than anything yet in the campaign.

And see Freedom's Lighthouse, "Newt Gingrich Slams Mitt Romney as “Fundamentally Dishonest” in Nevada Press Conference; Says He Can be Frontrunner Again by the April 3 Texas Primary – Complete Video 2/4/12."

ADDED: At The Other McCain, "Mitt Romney Wins Nevada Caucuses; Gingrich Blames Mormons for His Loss," and The Lonely Conservative, "Newt Gingrich gave an angry speech. He even brought up Mormons. At this point, I’m all for anyone but Newt. The guy is nuts."

What? No Beer for the Superbowl? What's Happened to This Country?!!

Well, maybe the numbers are down, but I don't think we've seen the end of beer consumption on Superbowl Sunday.

See the Los Angeles Times, "Beer brewers revise playbooks to win back lost customers":

Super Bowl Sunday promises to be another epic day in the annals of gluttony, with Americans consuming 1.3 billion chicken wings, 2,000 tons of popcorn and enough avocados to cover the floor of the Indianapolis stadium 28 feet deep.

But there will probably be a bit less beer to wash it all down because of changing tastes and the growing appeal of wine and cocktails as alternatives.

Beer sales have been on the decline in the U.S., with shipments dipping 1.4% last year to 210 million barrels, an eight-year low, according to trade publication Beer Marketer's Insights. Anheuser-Busch, whose brands include Budweiser and Bud Light, slipped below the 100 million-barrel benchmark for the first time in a decade.

Brewers are fighting back, introducing craft beers and other spins on the classic beverage in a bid to recapture straying customers. Anheuser-Busch InBev, which is spending at least $30 million on Super Bowl ads, will devote two of its six game-time spots to one of those products, its new higher-alcohol Bud Light Platinum.

That brew's 6% alcohol content reflects Americans' growing thirst for drinks with more kick and perceived sophistication. Sales of both wine and hard liquor such as vodka, bourbon and whiskey are up 4% or more over the last year, helped in part by images in popular media.

Continue reading.

More later.

Tea Party Activists Will Back Romney

Romney's no tea partier, and he's learning conservatism on the stump, with difficulty. But he's winning and he's looking more inevitable. And tea partiers won't have anywhere else to go --- and it'd be a disaster if they stayed home on election day.

At Boston Globe, "Tea Party voters more open to Romney":

RENO, Nev. - Tea Party activists, long dismissive of Mitt Romney, insist that most of the movement’s legions will back him if he continues to surge toward nomination, with a few already urging Republicans of all kinds to unite now to defeat President Obama.

The slowly building shift in outlook on Romney is by no means universal or set in stone. Some activists still express hope that Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, or Ron Paul will regain traction.

Yet, groups previously opposed to Romney are beginning to prepare their members to embrace the former Massachusetts governor as their best shot at defeating an incumbent president they distrust even more.

Continue reading.

Defiant Gingrich Vows to Stay in Race

At Washington Post, "Gingrich vows to fight on to the convention."

And at New York Times, "Gingrich Pledges Bitter Battle Until Convention":

Newt Gingrich vowed again to stay in the Republican presidential contest until the convention in August and said he will spend the next several months engaged in a bitter battle with Mitt Romney.

Speaking to the press after the Nevada caucuses Saturday, Mr. Gingrich repeatedly hammered Mr. Romney as a pro-abortion, pro-gun control, pro-taxes candidate who has the backing of the Republican establishment.

“I am a candidate for president of the United States,” he said. “I will be a candidate for president of the United States. I will go to Tampa.”

Mr. Romney ignored Mr. Gingrich in his victory speech tonight. But Mr. Gingrich seemed insistent on making sure that his rival cannot simply look the other way.

He accused Mr. Romney of purposely leaking false information about Mr. Gingrich’s plans to drop out of the presidential race, calling that Mr. Romney’s “greatest fantasy” in the race.

And Mr. Gingrich said that recent meetings he held with donors were meant to map out a plan to continue getting his message out despite Mr. Romney’s superior fund-raising.

“The entire establishment will be against us,” he predicted. But he said that by appearing on national television and doing interviews in newspapers, he will spread his agenda.

“The American people want somebody who is genuinely conservative, who is prepared to change Washington,” Mr. Gingrich said.

The question, really, is where can Newt win? Where will he do well in upcoming states? And when? He needs to do something fast. I don't have the answers right now, but I'll check and update. It's one thing to pledge a campaign all the way to the GOP convention in Tampa. It's another thing to do so without making yourself look like a sore loser and a fool.

More from Jonathan Tobin, at Commentary, "New Newt? Same Sore Loser Strategy."

Syria Releases Abu Musab al-Suri, Mastermind of London's 7/7 Terrorist Attacks

At Telegraph UK, "Syria releases the 7/7 'mastermind’":

The alleged terrorist mastermind behind the July 7 London bombings is reported to have been freed from a Syrian jail by President Bashar Assad's regime.

Abu Musab al-Suri had been held in Syria for six years after being captured by the CIA in 2005 and transported to the country of his birth under its controversial extraordinary rendition programme.

But he is now said to have been released as a warning to the US and Britain about the consequences of turning their backs on President al-Assad’s regime as it tries to contain the uprising in the country.

Al-Suri, also known as Mustafa Setmariam Nasar, was al-Qaeda’s operations chief in Europe and has been accused of planning the London bombings, in which four British-born terrorists detonated three bombs on the Underground and another on a bus, killing 52 people and injuring more than 700 others in 2005.

More at the link.

Great Tim Tebow Interview with Suzanne Malveaux on CNN

Hey, I watched this on Friday and here's the clip.

Tim Tebow is a real good guy and an awesome role model for young people:

RELATED: At Instapundit, "PROF. DONALD DOUGLAS takes a stand against bigotry."

Global Islamist Jihad and the Threat to America

Via Weasel Zippers, "Paint by Numbers: Andrew C. McCarthy — The Grand Jihad":

Super Bowl Viewers Don't Think Madonna's a Good Choice For Halftime Show

At Rasmussen:

Most Americans who plan on watching the Super Bowl this Sunday say they’ll watch the halftime show, but they aren’t thrilled about the performer. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that only 29% of Adults Who Will Watch the Super Bowl think Madonna is a good choice for the game’s half time show. Fifty-seven percent disagree, while 14% are undecided.

Update On Big Talking Harassment-Blogger Capt. Fogg of 'Human Voices'

Well, speaking of progressive totalitarians, cowardly left-wing hate blogger Capt. Fogg has been talkin' shit at Racist Repsac's harassment blog. I'm not commenting at Casper's, but I've had enough of his weaselly attacks and harassment, and I've had enough of his sponsorship of the hate. So to be clear: If folks are going to congregate at a criminal harassment blog, and if they're going to continue to coordinate their attacks against me and my livelihood, I'm going to continue calling them out. Fogg's a pseudonymous pussy. Get these people out into the real world, using their real names, and then report them to the authorities for criminal harassment. Don't back down to these losers, ever. See: "California Penal Code Section 653m on Criminal Harassment With Intent to Annoy: Report on Unwanted Illegal Contacts by Fascist Hate-Blogger Walter James Casper III."

Comments are closed at this post.

If I get comments or emails from these thugs, or other offline complaints, I'll be updating my reports to the police. And as to justify their continued harassment, some are now claiming (without documentation) that California has no jurisdiction in the matter. So the progressive harassers should beware of my seriousness: I will take it to the federal level if necessary. After I check back with local law enforcement, I will also report unwanted contacts to my congressman's office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the U.S. Department of Justice. See U.S. Code 18 Section 2261A, and especially U.S. Code 47 Section 223, which makes it a crime to use electronic equipment to engage in online harassment with the intent to annoy:

§ 223. OBSCENE OR HARASSING TELEPHONE CALLS IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OR IN INTERSTATE OR FOREIGN COMMUNICATIONS

(a) Prohibited acts generally

Whoever—

(1) in interstate or foreign communications—
(A) by means of a telecommunications device knowingly—
(i) makes, creates, or solicits, and
(ii) initiates the transmission of,
any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication which is obscene or child pornography, with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass another person...

To reiterate: Walter James Casper III and his progressive totalitarians are not going to continue to harass with impunity. They will not conspire to harass without consequence. These people are engaged in criminal activity and it needs to stop.

All appropriate law enforcement agencies will be notified, local, state, and federal.

PREVIOUSLY: "W. James Casper's Demonic Band of Progressive Totalitarians."

RELATED: At Zilla's, "Stand Against Evil - Never Let it Win."

The Real Story of Ronald Reagan in Hollywood

See Ron Radosh, at PJ Media, "What Ronald Reagan Accomplished in his Hollywood Years: A New LA Times Article Tells us The Real Story."

And following the link takes us to John Meroney's piece at the Times, "Left in the Past."

Good stuff.

Romney Wins With Wide GOP Support, Consolidates Momentum

At New York Times, "Romney Scores Nevada Victory With Broad G.O.P. Support":

LAS VEGAS — Mitt Romney handily won the Nevada caucuses on Saturday, solidifying his status as the front-runner and increasing his momentum as he seeks to use the month of February to ease doubts within the Republican Party about his candidacy and begin confronting President Obama.

Mr. Romney ran well ahead of his three opponents on a night that delivered his second decisive first-place finish in four days, following his victory in the Florida primary on Tuesday.

He appeared elated as he took the stage at his election headquarters at the Red Rock Casino hotel here, kissing his wife, Ann, who reminded the crowd that Nevada would be important in the general election, and hugging his sons before delivering a speech geared toward the fall.

“This is not the first time you’ve given me your vote of confidence, and this time I’m going to take it to the White House,” he said as the crowd chanted his name. And he delivered a harsh critique of Mr. Obama: “This week he’s been trying to take a bow for 8.3 percent unemployment. Not so fast, Mr. President.”

Nevada offers only a sliver of the delegates needed to win the Republican nomination, making it more of a symbolic triumph than a practical one. But it gave Mr. Romney an important opportunity to make a more assertive case that the party is finally coming together behind him.

It also gave him an advantage in his attempt to dispatch his chief Republican rival, Newt Gingrich, through the contests this week in Colorado, Minnesota and Maine.

The Romney victory further deflated the once-vital challenge posed by Mr. Gingrich, girding for a rough few weeks of political weather during which Mr. Romney is expected to do well. But Mr. Gingrich, who remained defiant on Saturday, hopes to revive his chances with stronger showings in the 11 states that vote on March 6, “Super Tuesday.”

Far from competing with Mr. Romney here in Nevada on Saturday, results showed that Mr. Gingrich was vying to place a distant second to Mr. Romney against Representative Ron Paul of Texas.

Also, at Washington Post, "Mitt Romney’s Nevada caucus win: What it means."

Mitt Romney Wins Nevada Caucuses

The outcome wasn't in doubt.

I think the question is what's up with Newt Gingrich? I'm watching his bizarre election-night press conference right now. I'll have more on that later. Meanwhile, here's LAT, "Mitt Romney cruises to win in Nevada caucuses: Win solidifies standing as overwhelming frontrunner":

Reporting from Las Vegas — Mitt Romney romped to a commanding victory Saturday in Nevada's Republican presidential caucuses, posting a second consecutive win and laying an impressive marker in a battleground state both parties will vigorously contest in November.

The strong showing, on top of Romney's landslide win Tuesday in Florida, boosted his delegate count and enhanced his standing as the overwhelming frontrunner in the fight for the GOP nomination.

Trailing far behind were former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, who were vying for second place. Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who eked out a win in Iowa but has faded since, was a distant fourth.

It takes 1,144 delegates to win the nomination and Romney has staked an early lead in that count. But more meaningful was the momentum he gains from strong back-to-back showings, which will carry him forward to the next round of balloting Tuesday in Minnesota, Colorado and Missouri.

Plus, Lonely Conservative has some comments, "Romney Takes Nevada" (via Memeorandum).

Russia and China Veto United Nations Resolution on Syria

This isn't surprising at all, or at least the actions of Russia and China.

What's surprising is how firm --- even bellicose --- Ambassador Susan Rice comes across in her statements. I'm long past the point of regime change in Syria, and we don't need the U.N to do it.

At the New York Times, "Russia and China Block U.N. Action on Syrian Crisis."

Newt Gingrich Explains Why He Didn't Call Mitt Romney After Florida Primary

Well, Gingrich didn't call Romney a punk, although Allah claims he's dyin' to, "Gingrich: Why should I call to congratulate some punk whose campaign says it’s trying to destroy me?"

RELATED: At National Post, "Mitt Romney poised to boost lead over rival Newt Gingrich in Nevada caucuses."

Well, true, although Newt again pledged at the clip to take it all the way to the convention. So, I'm intrigued about this press conference Gingrich plans for late tonight. See National Journal, "Gingrich to Hold Post-Caucus Press Conference." Maybe he going pull a Breitbart and tell the press to f-ck off. That'd be in keeping with his debate performance in weeks past, for example. That said, there's more on Gingrich in Nevada at the New York Times, "Gears Grind as Gingrich Shifts to Nevada."

'Extremely Loud'

I saw "Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close." I went yesterday afternoon. I was intrigued by this film from the moment I saw the preview, just days before Christmas. It came out in limited release in order to qualify for the Academy Awards. It opened Christmas Day.

Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock star, and of course that had something to do with my interest. Tom Hanks is probably my favorite actor, and I say probably because I don't really rate actors all that much. Hanks is on the left of the spectrum politically, but he's not progressive in the sense of the mainstream Democrat Party establishment today. Hanks is what a "liberal" used to be --- someone patriotic who believes in the positive role of America in the world in the defense of freedom. I imagine Hanks is also "liberal" in the old sense of believing that governmental institutions can leaven markets and help solve collective action problems (while not specifically attempting to destroy capitalism). And of course, Hanks' advocacy for the memory of the World War II generation is a major contribution to contemporary American life.

So it was no surprise to me that he'd be playing a lead role in a film which takes the September 11 attacks as the foundation of the story. I went into the movie with only the vaguest details of the story, since I frankly just skimmed the reviews in the most obligatory manner at the time. I knew I wanted to see it for the reasons stated above. Now that I have I confess to being more profoundly moved than I thought I'd be, and I say that with the confession that I did expect to be moved a little bit. I'm a hopelessly emotional sap when it comes to stuff like this. I think I've mentioned it before but the movies are the only place where I'll really cry. I don't get that emotional most other times. But the movies sometimes open me up and I wish I'd brought a box of tissue. This movie doesn't really have that one emotionally devastating scene where you can't hold it in any longer. The gushy scenes kind of ratchet up until the film's crescendo toward the conclusion. I was wiping my eyes a little by that time, but it wasn't a gusher or anything.

Mostly I was just amazed at how well the story was all tied together. The main character is Oskar, the 11-year-old boy who loses his dad (Thomas, played by Hanks) on 9/11. Thomas was in one of the towers, caught above the impact zone 100 stories or so near the top of the skyscraper. Thomas calls home and leaves messages on the answer machine. Oskar's school is closed because of the emergency and he comes home to hear the his father's voice. It's hard early in the movie to figure out how significant those taped messages are, but it's a powerful scene when we learn what happened.

Oskar is beyond precocious. He and his dad play together like best friends and Thomas designs games and adventures to challenge his son and help build his character. It's a love story between a boy and his father. There's some craziness in the pacing of the movie. The flashbacks between the present and the past are hard to separate temporally since the flashbacks only flash back a year to two before the present. And parts of the movie seem improbable: Oskar finds a key that belonged to his dad and he's convinced the key holds some magical significance. No doubt it's closure, but most 11-year-olds probably wouldn't be able to walk across all of New York City to track down the people, hundreds of people, who might have an answer to the mystery. (What does that key open?) But movies sometimes require a willing suspension of disbelief, and this one is so realistic in other respects --- and we love and trust the actors so much already --- that it's not hard to do.

It's a great film. It's nominated for best picture, although I can't say it's the best of 2011, having only seen one or two others that were nominated. However, it's a much more powerful movie than "War Horse" (which I saw a couple of weeks back and meant to write something about but procrastinated). There's an emotional closeness to "Extremely Loud" that's at once both endearing and devastating. "War Horse" was much less intense in that regard, although it's a great movie that deserves a nomination.

So with that, I was a bit caught off guard (although not surprised, actually) at progressive hate-blogger Scott Lemieux's attack on the movie, at the communist Lawyers, Guns and Money, "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Shitty?":

This was truly a banner year for terrible movies....

But I was interested to see several critics in the New York survey mentioned Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close. About 15 seconds into the first time I saw the preview it was clear that it was going to be a major threat to be the Academy’s middlebrow doorstop of choice. And that was before I knew it had been directed by Stephen Daldry, the homeless man’s Lasse Hallström and the most obvious choice to produce the kind of kitschy “serious” films that simulate content without having any. It’s based on a prominent bad novel using one horrible historical event as a backdrop, and also invokes two other horrible historical events while telling you nothing you didn’t already know about any of them or about anything else. It has an annoying precocious kid, who encounters Noble African-Americans. It has Tom Hanks. I mean talk about your Oscar bait. So did it get nominated? Oh, yes, and I can’t imagaine anyone thinks this is surprising. Has anyone seen it? Could anything be as bad as it looks?

All that and Lemieux hadn't even watched the film. And the "several critics" mentioned are those cited at a New York article on the year's worst movies. Reading those, along with Lemieux's response, it's not hard to figure out that these people simply can't stand that September 11th is used as an historical anchor to a movie about family, grief, and recovery. Progressives think the U.S. deserved 9/11 and they hate the institution of the family. Why on earth would they give a fuck about a film that features these things as the subject matter? Perhaps read the LGM comments there as well, at least to get a feeling of what radical leftists think about cinema and annual Oscar pageant overall. These losers aren't representative --- not of regular Americans, of course, but not of people in the movie industry either. "Extremely Loud" got great reviews, or at least great reviews in respectable sources. Here's Betsy Sharkey, at the Los Angeles Times, for example:

"Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close" is a handsomely polished, thoughtfully wrapped Hollywood production about the national tragedy of 9/11 that seems to have forever redefined words like unthinkable, unforgivable, catastrophic.

It has also redefined our expectations of filmmakers who try to examine the still aching wound — and perhaps explains why most films about 9/11 haven't resonated with audiences. Mindful of that, director Stephen Daldry has taken great care in looking at it through the eyes of a precocious New York City boy in a film filled with both sentiment and substance.

Finding the right balance was critical to making any adaptation of Jonathan Safran Foer's provocative novel work. But this is a filmmaker who's equally sensitive and bold in handling films with heavy emotional and political content as he has in "Billy Elliot," "The Hours" and "The Reader," all of which earned him Oscar nominations. He's up to the task again with "Extremely Loud," which opens Sunday.

Like the novel that inspired the film, screenwriter Eric Roth ("Munich") has brought things back to ground zero through the story of one family torn asunder by the World Trade Center attacks. So it seems a smart choice to put two quintessentially heartland stars in Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock at its center. It makes acceptance easier, offense harder.

Keep reading.

Manohla Dargis is more critical in her review at the New York Times, "A Youngster With a Key, a Word and a Quest." She writes:

In truth, “Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close” isn’t about Sept. 11. It’s about the impulse to drain that day of its specificity and turn it into yet another wellspring of generic emotions: sadness, loneliness, happiness. This is how kitsch works. It exploits familiar images, be they puppies or babies — or, as in the case of this movie, the twin towers — and tries to make us feel good, even virtuous, simply about feeling. And, yes, you may cry, but when tears are milked as they are here, the truer response should be rage.

Okay. Right.

We should have rage. Personally, it's enraging that we've had so few films of this caliber dealing 9/11 that we should bemoan kitsch and demand rage. That's progress.

In any case, Mandelyn Kilroy has an approving review at Philly Buzz, where she notes, it's "a must-see movie, just make sure to pack the tissues."

That's good advice.

Totalitarian Feminism

From James Taranto, at Wall Street Journal, "Big Sister Is Watching You: Totalitarian Feminism and the Smearing of Susan G. Komen" (via Memeorandum and Neptunus Lex).

More From Gwyneth Paltrow in Harper's Bazaar

Following up from my earlier report, "Gwyneth Paltrow on March Cover of Harper's Bazaar."

This can be today's big Rule 5 entry.

Mississippi Mom Linda Smith Devastated by Haley Barbour Pardon for Convicted DUI Felon

This clip is almost unbearable to watch. It makes me cry.

At CNN, "Pardoned DUI Convict Faces More Charges in Fatal Accident":

Background on the pardons here.

Big-Time Sports Have Become the Public Face of American Universities

This is one of the other big topics of discussion when Professor Greg Joseph and I meet for lunch.

USC's the worst (or at least we think so), although some of the other universities mentioned here are right up there.

At New York Times, "How Big-Time Sports Ate College Life":

IT was a great day to be a Buckeye. Josh Samuels, a junior from Cincinnati, dates his decision to attend Ohio State to Nov. 10, 2007, and the chill he felt when the band took the field during a football game against Illinois. “I looked over at my brother and I said, ‘I’m going here. There is nowhere else I’d rather be.’ ” (Even though Illinois won, 28-21.)

Tim Collins, a junior who is president of Block O, the 2,500-member student fan organization, understands the rush. “It’s not something I usually admit to, that I applied to Ohio State 60 percent for the sports. But the more I do tell that to people, they’ll say it’s a big reason why they came, too.”

Ohio State boasts 17 members of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, three Nobel laureates, eight Pulitzer Prize winners, 35 Guggenheim Fellows and a MacArthur winner. But sports rule.

“It’s not, ‘Oh, yeah, Ohio State, that wonderful physics department.’ It’s football,” said Gordon Aubrecht, an Ohio State physics professor.

Last month, Ohio State hired Urban Meyer to coach football for $4 million a year plus bonuses (playing in the B.C.S. National Championship game nets him an extra $250,000; a graduation rate over 80 percent would be worth $150,000). He has personal use of a private jet.

Dr. Aubrecht says he doesn’t have enough money in his own budget to cover attendance at conferences. “From a business perspective,” he can see why Coach Meyer was hired, but he calls the package just more evidence that the “tail is wagging the dog.”

Dr. Aubrecht is not just another cranky tenured professor. Hand-wringing seems to be universal these days over big-time sports, specifically football and men’s basketball. Sounding much like his colleague, James J. Duderstadt, former president of the University of Michigan and author of “Intercollegiate Athletics and the American University,” said this: “Nine of 10 people don’t understand what you are saying when you talk about research universities. But you say ‘Michigan’ and they understand those striped helmets running under the banner.”

For good or ill, big-time sports has become the public face of the university, the brand that admissions offices sell, a public-relations machine thanks to ESPN exposure. At the same time, it has not been a good year for college athletics. Child abuse charges against a former Penn State assistant football coach brought down the program’s legendary head coach and the university’s president. Not long after, allegations of abuse came to light against an assistant basketball coach at Syracuse University. Combine that with the scandals over boosters showering players with cash and perks at Ohio State and, allegedly, the University of Miami and a glaring power gap becomes apparent between the programs and the institutions that house them.

“There is certainly a national conversation going on now that I can’t ever recall taking place,” said William E. Kirwan, chancellor of the University of Maryland system and co-director of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics. “We’ve reached a point where big-time intercollegiate athletics is undermining the integrity of our institutions, diverting presidents and institutions from their main purpose.”

RTWT.

NewsBusted: 'MSNBC's Alice Wagner says Reagan would be a Democrat today'

Via Theo Spark:

'The Five' Discuss Komen Foundation Reversal on Planned Parenthood Funding

Pay attention to Greg Gutfeld's "knock, knock" joke especially, about half way through the clip:

And see also Mark Steyn, at IBD, "Lockstep Liberalism Makes the Komen Foundation Grovel."

London's Daily Mail Has Those Kelly Brook Bikini Pics From Brazil

Following up from the other day...

...check Daily Mail, "What happened to the bikinis you designed? Kelly Brook pours her curves into swimwear bought from a beach vendor in Brazil."

Race for the Smear

At Wall Street Journal, "A Cancer Charity Gets a Brutal Lesson in Abortion Politics":

Planned Parenthood is not about to let anyone escape without exacting retribution. With the help of allies in politics, the media and other advocacy groups, this week it undertook a vicious campaign against Komen that explicitly urged corporate donors to cut off the charity if it didn't relent. Individual Komen board members have been publicly attacked, as if trying to stay neutral in abortion politics is a crime against women.

Yesterday Komen responded by seeming to back down. "We will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants," Komen founder Nancy Brinker said in a statement.

It's unclear whether Planned Parenthood has actually brought Komen to heel. Austin Ruse of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute argues that the wording of Ms. Brinker's latest statement reflects no actual change in policy. Komen never planned to revoke existing grants, and eligibility to apply for a grant does not necessarily mean eligibility to receive one. He advises that potential donors to Komen wait and see.

Apart from the brutal lesson in the intolerance of abortion advocates, the larger principle at stake is the right of a charity to donate to whomever it likes, for whatever reason it likes. Mr. Bloomberg is free to do whatever he wants with his money. But it is to his great discredit that he would join a campaign to smear Komen for exercising exactly the same right.

Word.

PREVIOUSLY:

* "Imaginary Mammograms."

* "Susan G. Komen Apology From CEO Nancy G. Brinker."

* "Susan G. Komen 'Snapped Like a Toothpick' Amid Left's Unprecedented Campaign of Hatred and Smears."

* "Susan G. Komen Caves to Murderous Radical Left Abortion Industry."

* "Truth Is, Planned Parenthood Doesn't Do Mammograms — Progressives Outraged at Funding Cuts While Donations Pour Into Susan G. Komen."

First, They Came For the Catholics

Here's Michelle's column from the other day, before the Komen backlash erupted:

President Obama and his radical feminist enforcers have had it in for Catholic medical providers from the get-go. It’s about time all people of faith fought back against this unprecedented encroachment on religious liberty. First, they came for the Catholics. Who’s next?

This weekend, Catholic bishops informed parishioners of the recent White House edict forcing religious hospitals, schools, charities, and other health and social service providers to provide “free” abortifacient pills, sterilizations, and contraception on demand in their insurance plans – even if it violates their moral consciences and teachings of their churches.

NARAL, NOW, Ms. Magazine, and the Feminist Majority Foundation all cheered the administration’s abuse of the Obamacare law to ram abortion down pro-life medical professionals’ throats. Femme dinosaur Eleanor Smeal gloated over the news that the administration had rejected church officials’ pleas for compromises: “At last,” she exulted, the Left’s goal of “no-cost birth control” for all had been achieved.

As always, tolerance is a one-way street in the Age of Obama. “Choice” is in the eye (and iron fist) of the First Amendment usurper.

Like the rising number of states who have revolted against the individual health care care mandate at the ballot box and in the courts, targeted Catholics have risen up against the Obamacare regime. Arlington (Va.) Bishop Paul Loverde didn’t mince words, calling the U.S. Department Health and Human Services order “a direct attack against religious liberty. This ill-considered policy comprises a truly radical break with the liberties that have underpinned our nation since its founding.” Several bishops vowed publicly to fight the mandate.

Bishop Alexander Sample of Marquette, Michigan asserted plainly: “We cannot—we will not—comply with this unjust law.”

It’s not just rabid right-wing politicos defying the Obama machine. Pro-life Democratic Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania denounced the “wrong decision.” Left-leaning Bishop Robert Lynch threatened “civil disobedience” in St. Petersburg, Florida, over the power grab. Lefty Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne wrote that Obama “botched” the controversy and “threw his progressive Catholic allies under the bus” by refusing to “balance the competing liberty interests here.”

Continue reading.

Jessica Mokdad Human Rights Conference Cover-Up

At Atlas Shrugs, "VIDEO: Pamela Geller on FOX News Report of Jessica Mokdad Human Rights Conference and Family Cover-Up."

Plus, "DEFENDING THE WEST: The Dhimmedia's Whitewashing of Honor Killing."

Second Teacher Arrested in Miramonte Elementary School Sex Abuse Scandal

I just can't even imagine how the parents are feeling. "Worst nightmare" only begins to describe the horror of something like this. Seriously.

At Los Angeles Times, "Second teacher arrested at L.A. school where Mark Berndt worked," and "Official: 2nd accused teacher at L.A. school will be fired quickly."

And at London's Daily Mail, "Second teacher arrested for 'fondling two 7 year old girls' at school where pupils were 'spoon fed semen on cookies'."

Imaginary Mammograms

From last year, via Live Action:

And here's this from Live Action just today, "The Numbers Don’t Lie: Planned Parenthood, Komen, & Breast Exams."

Susan G. Komen Apology From CEO Nancy G. Brinker

Here's the statement from the Komen Foundation, "Statement from Susan G. Komen Board of Directors and Founder and CEO Nancy G. Brinker."

And see Los Angeles Times, "Consultants weigh in on how Komen for the Cure handled the crisis":

The days-long roller coaster of statements and reactions from Susan G. Komen for the Cure about Planned Parenthood is a good lesson in bad crisis management, say consultants who have been watching the events unfold.

The situation has been a "total embarrassment" for Komen, said Tom Madden, chief executive of TransMedia Group, a Boca Raton, Fla.-based public relations ad crisis management company. "There should have been a lot of thought through that kind of decision, and it sounds to me like the ramifications and pressures they were under were not anticipated, which was a failure of planning. I can't believe an organization like Komen wasn't aware of what was going on."

Continue reading.

Actually, Komen did know what was going on, but I doubt they anticipated how intense the reaction would be. For progressives, if you're not pro-abortion you're basically a Nazi.

I'm sure I'll have more on this ...

Obama's Tough Road to 270

From Ronald Brownstein, at National Journal, "Rocky Terrain: Obama's Electoral College Map Grows Steeper":

The Gallup state-by-state average approval numbers for 2011 released this week don't necessarily predict where President Obama will finish on Election Day, but they do measure the hill he must climb to win re-election.

The most important number in presidential elections, of course, is 270 - the number of Electoral College votes it takes to win. The best way to examine the Gallup numbers is to measure them against that yardstick.

In 2010, if you sorted down from Obama's highest approval rating to his lowest, he could reach 270 Electoral College votes by carrying the 22 states plus the District of Columbia where his approval rating stood at 46.9 percent or more. Since one of the states above that line was Mississippi, a state Obama has almost no chance of carrying in practice, a more realistic scenario was that to reach an Electoral College majority he would have to carry those 21 states plus Virginia, where his approval rating stood at 46.6 percent.

That would have been challenging, but not imposingly so. Political strategists used to believe that incumbents were unlikely to win elections (or carry states) where their approval rating lagged below 50 percent; but given the widespread cynicism about politicians many strategists on both sides believe the tipping point is now around 47 percent. Below that number, incumbents are a distinct underdog; above it, they are favored, with the ground tilting much more toward them once they cross 50 percent.

In the 2011 numbers, the situation looks much more difficult for Obama. From 2010 to 2011, Gallup found, his average approval ratings dropped in every state except Connecticut, Maine and (oddly enough) Wyoming. As a result, to reach 270 Electoral College votes based on the 2011 numbers, he would need to win 20 states plus the District of Columbia where his approval rating stands at 44.5 percent or more. Since one of the states above that line is Georgia, which is also a stretch for Obama in practice, to reach 270 he would more likely need to carry Oregon and North Carolina, where his approval ratings stood at 44.5 percent and 43.7 percent, respectively. (It's worth filing away that the scenario based on either year's numbers - Virginia and North Carolina  stand right at the tipping point between victory and defeat for Obama.)

In sum then, Obama in 2010 could reach an Electoral College majority by carrying states where his approval rating stood at least at 46.6 percent, something that would be difficult but hardly impossible. To reach a majority based on the 2011 results, he'd need to carry states where his approval stood at 43.7 percent or above. That's a much more daunting prospect.

And see Politico as well, "Why Obama should be worried."

RELATED: From Tyler Durden, "Record 1.2 Million People Fall Out Of Labor Force In One Month, Labor Force Participation Rate Tumbles To Fresh 30 Year Low."

Susan G. Komen 'Snapped Like a Toothpick' Amid Left's Unprecedented Campaign of Hatred and Smears

See Brent Bozell, at NewsBusters, "NB Publisher Bozell: Komen 'Snapped Like a Toothpick' In Response to Liberal Media Pressure."

And see Daniel Foster, at National Review, "You Should Find the Anti-Komen Backlash Disgusting, Even If You're Pro-Choice" (via Memeorandum).

Susan G. Komen Caves to Murderous Radical Left Abortion Industry

Jammie has the story: "Komen Caves to Feminazis." (Via Memeorandum.)

And at Dallas Morning News, "Komen apologizes for 'recent decisions,' pledges to continue funding Planned Parenthood."

Also at New York Times, "Cancer Group Backs Down on Cutting Off Planned Parenthood."

'Atlas Shrugged' Sequel Secures Financing, Production to Start in April

At Los Angeles Times, "'Atlas Shrugged Part 2' to start production in April."

Well, progressive heads will explode at the news. I can't remember a film more reviled by the left. Liberty, initiative and personal responsibility ward off leftists like garlic to vampires.

No Fast and Furious Cover-Up? Eric Holder Defends Bloody Culture of Contempt

Michelle has the big story: "Fast and Furious showdown: Holder/Obama defend bloody culture of contempt; UPDATE: Fortress Holder, Stonewall City; vid clips added, Dems advise, “Don’t answer”."

Michelle has more video at the link.

Blake Lively's Smokin' Hot Photo Shoot for March Issue of Elle

She looks great.

At London's Daily Mail, "'I've never been with anyone that's not a boyfriend': Blake Lively insists she is whiter than white as she poses for Elle magazine."

Canadian Confusion Over Honor Killings

From Jerry Philipson, at American Thinker (via Blazing Cat Fur).

The Arab Spring One Year Later

I miss Glenn Beck on Fox News. He's a good man and great to see him at the clip here:

RELATED: A great piece from Melanie Phillips, "Why does the ailing west aid its Islamist enemies?"

Leslie Carter OD'd

Well, LAT says "may have": "Leslie Carter, sis of Nick and Aaron, may have OD'd, report says."

But see ABC News, "Leslie Carter Overdosed, Was Under the Influence of Several Drugs, According to Police Report":

Leslie Carter overdosed and was under the influence of several drugs before her death, according to an incident report obtained by ABCNews.com from officials who responded to her family's 911 call.

The report lists three drugs that were found near Carter: Olanzapine, used to treat the symptoms of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder; Cyclobenzaprine, a muscle relaxant; and Alprazolam, used to treat anxiety or panic disorders, also known as Xanax.

The report reveals that Ginger Carter, Leslie's stepmother, told authorities that Leslie had "a long history of mental illness and was on medication for her depression." Her stepmother said that Leslie seemed depressed the morning of Jan. 30, and that she fell in the shower. Ginger Carter helped Leslie lie down, at first with Leslie's 10-month-old daughter, and periodically checked on her. Late in the afternoon, she found that Leslie was not breathing. Robert Carter, Leslie's father, tried to perform CPR on her, and Leslie's stepmother then called 911.

Ginger Carter also appeared to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol or both, according to the incident report. "Ginger had slurred speech, pinpoint pupils, glassy eyes and kept falling asleep," the report states. Ginger Carter told officials that she had taken "five to six pills for her depression," possibly Xanax, and took more than her usual dose of four "because of Leslie passing away." Authorities told ABCNews.com that they would try to reinterview Ginger when she is "more alert."

I knew when I first saw the story. She was just 25 years old and initial reports said she passed away at home without citing the cause of death. Photos of Ms. Carter then showed her looking sort of drugged out. My thoughts were someone was terribly wrong. The life of a beautiful young woman, with an obviously loving family, cut short. It's sad.

Media Matters Digs In

From Yid With Lid, "As Criticism Over Anti-Semitism Increases - Media Matters Digs In Its Heels."

The Escalating Craziness Among Republicans

See Robert Stacy McCain, "Quin Hillyer Denounces Jeffrey Lord as a ‘Purveyor of Smear Jobs … Despicable’."

And from Dan Riehl, "It's Insane For Conservatives to Back Romney In the General Election."

HBO's 'Game Change' Depicts Sarah Palin on Verge of Nervous Breakdown

At LAT, "'Game Change': Sarah Palin on the verge of a nervous breakdown."

I'd be interested in checking it out, although who knows how much of this to trust?  See ABC News, "Critics: HBO Movie Trailer Puts Sarah Palin in Bad Light":

HBO’s critics on the Right were apparently right about the network’s upcoming movie “Game Change,” about Sen. John McCain’s run for the presidency in 2008.

While the network claimed the movie would be even-handed politically, it seems Sarah Palin doesn’t come off too well in the trailer.

Critics decried the HBO film from the get-go as a hit piece on the former Alaska governor who became the target of a merciless media and political barrage after McCain chose her as his running mate.

Starring Ed Harris and Julianne Moore — who in the past has been critical of Palin — the movie, which premieres on March 10, depicts how McCain’s team picked the former Alaska governor and then subsequently, had second thoughts about it when Palin seemed to fold under pressure.

The book of the same name on which the movie is based is about the entire 2008 election, but the filmmakers — who also produced the Left-leaning HBO movie “Recount” — chose to focus on the Palin/McCain part of the book.

Included in the trailer is Palin claiming that Russia can be seen from Alaska as Woody Harrelson, who plays McCain adviser Steven Schmidt, quips, “Oh my God, what have we done?”

More at the link.

Truth Is, Planned Parenthood Doesn't Do Mammograms — Progressives Outraged at Funding Cuts While Donations Pour Into Susan G. Komen

John McCormick has a report on the Susan G. Komen controversy, at Weekly Standard, "After Lying About Providing Mammograms, Planned Parenthood Outraged That Breast Cancer Charity Cuts Off Grants."

And here's this, from Jill Stanek at Life Site News, "The inside story on Komen’s split from Planned Parenthood":

I was on the road this week when the news broke that Susan G. Komen for the Cure was defunding Planned Parenthood.

Since then abortion proponents and news organizations have worked themselves into a frenzy speculating why it happened and who is to blame – from George W. Bush, to new SGK VP of public policy Karen Handel.

This is the first chance I’ve had to sit down and write what I know.

I have a source who reaches into the SGK board of directors. My source told me in December this split was in the works but that SGK did not want to make a big splash about it. Their plan was to disentangle from Planned Parenthood quietly and move on.

It was Planned Parenthood, not SGK, that tipped off the Associated Press with the news of the break, just as it was Planned Parenthood that tipped off the AP about Live Action’s sex trafficking sting, and Planned Parenthood that tipped off Washington Post’s Sarah Kliff about Congressman Cliff Stearns’ investigation.

Planned Parenthood’s modus operandi is to try to destroy its enemy first. Planned Parenthood does this to try to manage the messaging and ameliorate the damage. Note from the AP article:

Komen, while not publicly announcing its decision to halt the grants, has conveyed the news to its 100-plus U.S. affiliates. Richards said she was informed via a phone call from Komen’s president, Elizabeth Thompson, in December.

My source said Planned Parenthood broke the story for an additional reason: to frighten other corporations from trying to do what SGK did. See what will happen to you if you dare, is Planned Parenthood’s underlying warning. My source said this will not work. Other organizations are anticipated to follow SGK’s lead.

Continue reading.

And see Steve Ertelt, at Life News, "Komen Donations Jump 100% After Cutting Planned Parenthood."

BONUS: Check the New York Times' report, "Uproar as Komen Foundation Cuts Money to Planned Parenthood" (via Memeorandum).

'Ain't Talkin' 'Bout Love'

This clip's apparently from 2007 and includes the current lineup.

More blogging tonight.


PREVIOUSLY: "Hey, Hey, Hey!"

Gwyneth Paltrow on March Cover of Harper's Bazaar

The public relations office at Harper's sent me some pictures of Gwyneth Paltrow.

See: "The Real Gwyneth."

Scores Killed in Riots After Egypt Soccer Match

At CNN, "Egyptian health ministry: 74 dead, hundreds injured in soccer riots," and Los Angeles Times, "Egypt soccer match brawl leaves at least 73 dead."

Mitt Romney, Cheap and Empty

Check George Neumayr, at the American Spectator, "Romney's Cheap and Empty Win":

Mitt Romney's plastic and philosophically vapid campaign secured an easy victory in Florida on Tuesday night. Sunshine state GOP voters swallowed his "electability" argument whole, according to the exit polls.

It appears that country club Republicans have succeeded again in duping the GOP electorate into crowning a "centrist" Republican. Never mind that "centrist" Republicans rarely win the center. They usually lose the center while sapping the spirit of the party's conservative base.

Out of Bob Dole's and John McCain's tattered Big Tent steps another "reformed" RINO, Mitt Romney, who will receive, should he win the nomination, a similar thumping from the Democrats.

But let's say that he is "electable," for the sake of argument. Who cares? The purpose of politics in a republic is not simply to win but to win on sound principles. A party that pursues victory by scrapping or sidelining its platform will have no truth left with which to govern once it does.

If "electability" is the goal, why don't the politically correct plutocrats of the GOP just call for a one-party state? That way they could win every time.

The "electability" argument is bankrupt on both philosophical and practical grounds. It destroys the party's soul and guarantees defeat.

Even though Romney paid for this Florida win on his debit card -- outspending Newt by millions -- he still couldn't nail down the rank-and-file vote. Seven out of ten self-described conservatives didn't vote for him. This foreshadows the boredom and disgust that will keep conservatives home in the fall.

Continue reading.

Standing Firm Against the Genocidal Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Campaign

This is good.

Blazing Cat Fur has the background, "Stop Calling Me Hitler Warns Hitler."

Blazing links to the outrageous outrage at the Electronic Intifada, where we find an outraged attack on Professor Rubin Gur of the Departments of Psychiatry, Radiology and Neurology at the University of Pennsylvania.

And the source of all that outrage? Well, it's Professor Gur's righteous essay at the Daily Pennsylvanian, "BDS is 'Hateful', 'Discriminatory'":

I could barely believe my eyes. It is bad enough that Penn has allowed itself to be associated with this hateful genocidal organization, but for you to give room for their “explanation” and then dignify this outpouring of misinformation and anti-Semitism to the level of guest column without any kind of balancing opinion? Is this fair and balanced journalism? Is this the Daily Pennsylvanian I was reading daily since I came here in 1974?

The “explanation” itself presents a fuzzy “anti-Israel” cloak that barely conceals the Hamas and Hizballah daggers. It will deceive only those who, knowing nothing of the history, cannot tell lies from truth, or who, so blinded by animus against Israel and Jews, are willing to be deceived.

The agenda of this group is totally negative and aimed at the only Jewish state on the planet, scheming to inflict damage on it as an alleged violator of human rights. No mention of most of the Arab world, or any of the many countries where human rights are trampled on daily.

If the organizers truly cared about Human Rights, perhaps they should consider targeting the primary perpetrators of abuse, and not the only country in the Middle East that is free and democratic by numerous metrics. Israeli Arabs enjoy better civil rights than Arabs in most Arab countries, while by contrast Palestinians are treated as second-class citizens in many Arab countries to this day. If this group really wanted to improve the lot of Palestinians, they should target Lebanon, Syria, and the Hamas gang currently ruling Gaza.

The purpose of BDS as presented seems similar to what was apparently stated in their version of “Mein Kampf” (I am referring to Omar Barghouti’s book titled “Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions”) and base my understanding of it on the article in the Harvard Crimson.

Notably, true to Crimson’s standards the referenced piece by Mr. Don is written in a way that does not slander any of Penn’s esteemed faculty. By contrast, your Guests from BDS are allowed to introduce our esteemed colleague Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz as a “notorious Israel apologist.” And this passed your editorial review under the guise of an “Explanation”?

The aim of the hateful and discriminatory BDS rhetoric is to delegitimize Israel in preparation for the ultimate goal of its destruction. A relevant precedent for such a movement is the groups organized by the Nazis in the 1930’s to boycott, divest and sanction Jews and their businesses. Sadly, now as then, there are Jews among the posse in the assault on their own people. The macabre sight of the likes of Stella Kübler, (arguably Hannah Arendt) and the Capos in the extermination camps is about to be replayed here at Penn.

The students organizing this event and their sponsors will tarnish Penn for generations to come. Penn’s moral backbone has allowed it thus far to balance the sanctity of free speech against the need to prohibit hateful speech. That backbone will break that day. From then on Penn has made an exception: Unproductive, hateful speech is allowed – as long as it singles out Jews and Israel.

Shame on you DP. Shame on you Penn. Shame on you.

Occupy Wall Street: The Communist Movement Reborn

David Horowitz is out with a new pamphlet, "Occupy Wall Street: The Communist Movement Reborn."

And see also Rick Moran, at FrontPage Magazine, "The True Face of Occupy Wall Street":

More than 400 Occupy Wall Street protesters in Oakland were arrested after a wild night of violence, vandalism, and confrontations with police. “Officers were pelted with bottles, metal pipe, rocks, spray cans, improvised explosive devices and burning flares,” reports the New York Times. The rioters also broke into historic Oakland City Hall, smashing display cases, spray painting graffiti on the walls, cutting electrical wires, and with the crowd chanting “Burn it! Burn it!” set fire to an American flag. City authorities estimate that damages to city property amounts to about $5 million since the protests began last October.

A CNN headline reporting on the riot: “Occupy Oakland demonstrations, arrests inject new life into movement.” Perhaps this is true. But at the cost of rampaging rioters destroying public property? What kind of movement needs that kind of impetus to receive “new life”?

The Oakland riot is proof positive that whatever claim to innocence and idealism the movement purported in the early days of occupations around the country has been lost to the gimlet-eyed revolutionary left, now openly seeking violent confrontation with authorities using the bodies of the naive and foolish who still believe that OWS is a protest against income inequality and corporatism. Cadres of organized leftists came prepared to the Oakland protest with homemade gas masks and shields — a clear indication that they fully expected to provoke a police response. Innocent protesters do not come armed with “bottles, metal pipe, rocks, spray cans, improvised explosive devices and burning flares.” The transformation of the occupy movement from protest to “direct action” — the preferred tactic of the European Communist Left for generations — is nearly complete. There can be no sniveling denials from OWS apologists any more: The driving force behind the OWS movement — the goal of those who control the streets — is revolution and the overthrow of America’s capitalist system.

Continue reading.

PREVIOUSLY: "Manifesto: Occupy for the Revolution."

Crossroads GPS Goes Up With Huge New Ad Buy Slamming Obama on Solyndra

At The Hill, "Crossroads GPS hits Obama over Solyndra with new ad campaign":

Crossroads GPS is taking aim at President Obama over his administration’s $535 million loan guarantee to failed solar company Solyndra with a new national television advertisement.

In the new ad, the nonprofit group created by Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie paints the Solyndra loan guarantee as a corrupt deal aimed at benefiting the president’s campaign donors.

“Laid-off workers forgotten. Tell President Obama we need jobs, not more insider deals,” the $500,000 ad, which will run on cable for a week, says.

It’s the latest attempt by conservative groups to punish Obama politically over the loan guarantee. Americans for Prosperity — a group partially funded by the billionaire Koch brothers — has spent more than $8 million on two advertisements that hit Obama over the loan guarantee.

More at the link.

The Last Tradition Rocks Some Kelly Brook!

Dude, that's what I'm talkin' about!

See, "Kelly Brook teeny bikini is driving 'em nuts in Brazil."

That video's from a couple of years back, but TLT has the recent pics, so check that link!

Demi Moore's Desperate Attempt to Shag Zac Efron

This lady needs help.

It's too bad too --- she's very beautiful, but that "cougar" thing is bad for your health.

At Los Angeles Times, "Demi Moore plot thickens: Pursuing Zac Efron, fountain of youth?":

Demi Moore isn't having the best week, as far as newsstands are concerned. The actress has reportedly been battling massive insecurity with age and weight, as well as chasing young things like Zac Efron.

After her January hospitalization, allegedly thanks to a bad reaction to nitrous oxide and a smoke inhalant, reports are charging the "Margin Call" star with massive insecurities surrounding the breakdown of her marriage — all leading to this current crisis.

"She's been really down, and she's surrounding herself with young people to make her feel better," Us magazine cites one source as saying.

And by "surrounding" the report suggests Moore "tracked down" 24-year-old actor Zac Efron for companionship. This proposed hunt led to a party in L.A.'s Venice Beach neighborhood, prior to Moore's medical treatment.

"As Demi got older, she convinced herself that she needed to stay young and skinny to remain attractive to her husband," People magazine added to the party, via their own inside source.

Well, I guess there's a way to grow old gracefully, and then there's not...

Romney Screws Up With Comments About the Poor

At Los Angeles Times, "Mitt Romney trips up as GOP race moves westward":

The Republican presidential contest shifted to the West and Midwest on Wednesday as an exultant Mitt Romney dueled with the man he hopes to meet in November, President Obama, but found himself sidetracked when an infelicitous remark was seized upon by his opponents.

Romney's comment came as he sought, following his landslide win Tuesday in Florida, to cast himself as the inevitable nominee, a posture that had eluded him since his Jan. 21 collapse in South Carolina.

"I'm in this race because I care about Americans. I'm not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I'll fix it," he told CNN.

His characterization about the poor immediately metastasized online. Asked about it later, Romney explained, "Of course I'm concerned about all Americans — poor, wealthy, middle class — but the focus of my effort will be on middle-income families who I think have been most hurt by the Obama economy."

Newt Gingrich, a distant second in Florida, sought to take advantage of Romney's wording as he spoke to hundreds of supporters packed into Great Basin Brewing Co. in Reno.

"I am fed up with politicians in either party dividing Americans against each other," said Gingrich, at his first Nevada event before Saturday's caucuses. Drawing a sharp distinction between himself and Romney, he added, "I am running to be the president of all of the American people, and I am concerned about all of the American people."

Romney's comment also drew condemnation from Obama partisans who have repeatedly exploited the candidate's quotes to argue that Romney is out of touch. And Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), who endorsed Romney four years ago, encouraged him to "backtrack," saying the very poor needed jobs, not welfare programs.

I'm with DeMint on this. While Romney's comments aren't really that controversial --- at least not when placed in context --- this is hardly the message you want to send. The problem isn't that we don't have enough public assistance, but that we have too much of it. We've got soul-crushing dependence on government and destruction of personal responsibility. Dan Riehl has more, "Mitt Explains, Only to Step In It, Again ... And, Again."

See also Jennifer Rubin, who says his comments were decontextualized, "Romney on the safety net; anti-Romney media still unhinged."