Spitting Bull

Via Theo Spark:

Barack Obama's Abject Political Calculations on Homosexual Marriage

Elliot Abrams has a great piece on Obama's newfound support of gay marriage, "‘On My Behalf’ - Really?" (via Memeorandum):

The debate over same sex “marriage” has engaged the heartfelt feelings and convictions of millions of Americans. Then there is Barack Obama.

In his ABC interview, the president pretended that his much touted “evolution” had now led him, ineluctably, to speak out now, today; he simply could longer stay silent. ABC let him off the hook, but this is not a credible account.  In March, the Washington Post was reporting the debate among his advisers on whether the issue would help or hurt the reelection campaign and what, therefore, Obama should say: “Obama’s top political advisers have held serious discussions with leading Democrats about the upsides and downsides of coming out for gay marriage before the fall election.”

The same advisers told the Post that Obama would make the decision based on his gut, but that is an insulting way to refer to the vice president.  There is no evidence that Obama planned to speak until Joe Biden said last weekend that he was for gay “marriage” and forced the issue.

In fact, Obama has not “evolved”—he has changed his position whenever his political fortunes required him to do so. Running for the Illinois state senate from a trendy area of Chicago in 1996, he was for gay marriage. “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages,” he wrote in answer to a questionnaire back then. In 2004, he was running for the U.S. Senate and needed to appeal to voters statewide. So he evolved, and favored civil unions but opposed homosexual “marriage.” In 2008, running for president, he said, “I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage.” Now in 2012, facing a tough reelection campaign where he needs energized supporters of gay “marriage” and has disappointed them with his refusal to give them his support, he is for it. To paraphrase John Kerry, he was for it before he was against it before he was for it again.

Mr. Obama’s statement today is a marvel...

Continue reading.

PREVIOUSLY: "President Obama Backs Homosexual Marriage."

'It was so sharp and modern. It was mod, and we all wanted the mod look...'

From Ann Althouse, on the death of Vidal Sassoon, "'A clear example of an architectural hairstyle was the Five Point Geometric Cut, created by Sassoon in 1964 on a young model named Grace Coddington...'":

I've seen a lot of hairstyles come and go in my life. (I'm 61.) But I've got to say, there was ONE hairstylist who — as far as I can tell — invented something precisely new and distinctively his. Everyone knew was [sic] a Sassoon haircut was.

I wish I could find a perfect photograph of the way the cut made a "W" at the nape. It was so sharp and modern. It was mod, and we all wanted the mod look. It was easy to grow long hair and thick bangs, Patti Boyd style. But the alternative, the 5 points... how could you find anyone in your hometown who could cut hair like that? So glossily brilliant. The best idea for a hairstyle or at least nobody else ever came up with a better one.

Is that a perfect photograph of the "W" at the nape? I think it's a pretty good one, actually.

In any case, more at the link.

And see the New York Times, "Vidal Sassoon, Hairdresser and Trendsetter, Dies at 84."

President Obama Backs Homosexual Marriage

There's never been any question of whether Obama "supports" same-sex marriage. It's always been a question of when he could come out of the closet in support of destroying the traditional and historical institution of marriage without dropping a nuclear bomb on his election chances. The jury's still out on that question, which is why today's announcement is, in part, such a big deal. For example, North Carolina has 15 electors in the Electoral College, which are now that much further out of reach for the president with his endorsement of the radical pro-gay agenda. Chris Cillizza reports on that angle, "President Obama’s calculated gamble on gay marriage."

To be fair, though, I've long criticized Obama as a pussy on gay rights. So from a Democrat's point of view, I think he did the right thing. And despite North Carolina's win last night, the trend does seem toward greater acceptance of homosexual marriage over time. The president can now claim that he's on the "right side" of history, from the gay civil rights perspective. I still think it should be up to the states --- and I think it would be politically stupid for Republicans to hop on board the same-sex marriage express. The gay lobby is repulsive. These people are perhaps the most thuggish constituency in progressive politics. The shift in support on gay marriage in the polls is largely explained by respondents who are tired of being attacked as "bigots." That's not so much winning over supporters as beating your opponents into submission.

So with that, let the great 2012 social policy debate begin. If Mitt Romney really wants to show he's conservative, the president couldn't have handed him a better opportunity.

Robert Stacy McCain has more, "Hope and Change Go Gay."

And see all the debate at Memeorandum.

Naomi Schaefer Riley Is Married to the Wall Street Journal's Jason Riley, Who is Black

I think it's important to point that out, that Naomi Schaefer Riley is married to Jason Riley, the bespectacled and soft-spoken opinion writer at the Wall Street Journal.

Most of the discussion of Schaefer Riley is focusing on the left's intolerance of different opinion. That's big. It's a perfect example of the left's totalitarianism and thought control. And the reactions have been fierce, for example, from Jonathan Tobin at Commentary, "Silencing Dissent About Black Studies," and Jonathan Last at The Weekly Standard, "Mob on the Quad." And James Taranto perhaps penned the best headline of all: "The Comical of Higher Education."

Critics attacked Schaeffer Riley as a "racist" who was exploiting her "white privilege." These reactions are hysterical, for example, from Cherise at Racism Review:

Fortunately, as Black folks, we have learned to multi-task—to resist our oppression and defend ourselves and our labor even as we go about our research, teaching, and daily lives. Yet, the fact that we must do both speaks to the very nature of the racial inequality Naomi Schaefer Riley claims has all but disappeared.

All that for rightly calling out Black Studies as "left-wing victimization claptrap."

Once again progressives have proved that the attack of "racism" is utterly without content and significance. Schaefer Riley is by definition not racist. No woman espousing a racist, Jim Crow ideology of white supremacy would marry a black man. To argue otherwise is to rip the nation's genuine history of racial oppression out of its historical context of slavery and segregation. No, the left is attacking Schaefer Riley for purely ideological reasons, out of a sheer burst of progressive hatred at anyone who would dare speak out against the abject academic fraud of phony disciplines of racial victimology. It's a particularly powerful example of how bad things have gotten in this country.

Schaefer Riley, by her marriage, objectively demonstrates a United States that has transcended race. The progressive academics who attacked her, and her editors who threw her under the bus, are now in fact the main enemies of that obviously majestic and triumphant phenomenon of historical racial transcendence.

Ann Althouse has more, "The Chronicle of Higher Education fires blogger Naomi Schaefer Riley for mocking university Black Studies programs" (via Memeorandum). And Althouse links to Schaefer Riley's own piece at the Wall Street Journal, "The Academic Mob Rules."

Al Qaeda Bomber Was Double Agent Working for U.S. and Arab Intelligence Agencies

Well, who knew, really? I thought something was strange about this story all along, particularly with regard to AP's reporting. So here comes the news that the CIA planted a double agent inside al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. There's going to be lots more information on this over the next few days so consider this developing. So far, Rep. Peter King thinks the administration is in fact jerking the public, see: "Rep. King suggests administration may have misled public on bomb plot, Calls for review." Frankly, there's no doubt in my mind that Obama is working national security --- and coordinating press coverage according to intelligence rules --- to score political points. President #GutsyCall is going rogue.

Anyway, the Los Angeles Times reports, "Al Qaeda bomb plot was foiled by double agent."

And at the Wall Street Journal, "Bomb Plotter Was U.S. Informer: Double Agent Infiltrated Yemeni Terror Group, Fed Information to U.S. Intelligence":

The supposed bomber at the center of a foiled plot to bring down a jetliner was actually a double agent who funneled vital information to U.S. and Arab intelligence agencies, according to officials, marking an apparently successful infiltration of al Qaeda's most dangerous branch.

The revelation came a day after U.S. officials said the Central Intelligence Agency, working with foreign security services and other agencies, had thwarted a bomb plot by al Qaeda's Yemeni branch aimed at bringing down a U.S. jetliner with a more advanced version of an underwear bomb used in a failed 2009 Christmas Day attempt.

The newest plot appears to provide a chilling illustration of al Qaeda's determination to learn from its mistakes: The bomb that was recovered has two detonators, providing a crucial backup in the event one failed, a U.S. official said Tuesday.

According to a U.S. official familiar with the operation, the double agent spent several perilous weeks working inside al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, or AQAP, answering to a foreign intelligence service that works in concert with the CIA. Saudi intelligence officials played "a large role" in handling of the double agent inside AQAP, this official said.

The man was able to convince members of the Yemeni terror group that he wanted to carry out a suicide mission, the official said.

The man was given the bomb and general instructions for carrying out the attack, the official said. Instead of following those directions, however, when he left Yemen, he contacted intelligence authorities, turning over the bomb and fresh intelligence about AQAP.

Some of the information gathered in the course of the multiweek operation led to the U.S. drone strike in Yemen on Sunday that killed a top operative of the Yemeni group, officials said Tuesday.

The Saudi embassy in Washington had no immediate comment. In the past, some Saudi officials have chafed at characterizations that Saudi Arabia used former al Qaeda militants as informants to disrupt plots by the Yemeni branch.

Yemeni officials say they weren't informed about the operation.

Continue reading.

The Journal also mentions the possibility of a congressional GOP investigation of Obama's intelligence coordination and public manipulation.

Lugar Concession Speech Slams Mourdock: 'His Embrace of An Unrelenting Partisan Mindset Is Irreconcilable With My Philosophy of Governance'

Jeez, a sore loser or what?

At CNN, "In statement, Lugar defends campaign while criticizing partisan environment" (via Memeorandum):

From time to time during the last two years I heard from well-meaning individuals who suggested that I ought to consider running as an independent. My response was always the same: I am a Republican now and always have been. I have no desire to run as anything else. All my life, I have believed in the Republican principles of small government, low taxes, a strong national defense, free enterprise, and trade expansion. According to Congressional Quarterly vote studies, I supported President Reagan more often than any other Senator. I want to see a Republican elected President, and I want to see a Republican majority in the Congress. I hope my opponent wins in November to help give my friend Mitch McConnell a majority.

If Mr. Mourdock is elected, I want him to be a good Senator. But that will require him to revise his stated goal of bringing more partisanship to Washington. He and I share many positions, but his embrace of an unrelenting partisan mindset is irreconcilable with my philosophy of governance and my experience of what brings results for Hoosiers in the Senate. In effect, what he has promised in this campaign is reflexive votes for a rejectionist orthodoxy and rigid opposition to the actions and proposals of the other party. His answer to the inevitable roadblocks he will encounter in Congress is merely to campaign for more Republicans who embrace the same partisan outlook. He has pledged his support to groups whose prime mission is to cleanse the Republican party of those who stray from orthodoxy as they see it.

This is not conducive to problem solving and governance.

Sorry, Dick, but the times have passed you by.

And in case you missed it, there's been a grassroots tea party revolt raging for the past three years. Have a nice retirement.

Wake the F*ck Up Democrats!

From James Carville, at CNN, "Wake up Democrats; you could lose." (Via Memeorandum.)

(CNN) -- A long time ago a great three-time governor of Louisiana, Earl Long, said about Jimmie Davis, the two-time not very good governor of Louisiana, "You couldn't wake up Jimmie Davis with an earthquake."
As I go around the country and see various Democrats and talk to them on the phone, honestly I'm beginning to think that we have become the party of Jimmie Davis.

My message is simple: WTFU. Translated -- wake the you-know-what up, there is an earthquake....

You can shoot five Bin Ladens, you can save 10,000 banks and 20 car companies, even pass the most sweeping legislation in modern American history; if people don't think that you are connected to their lives and are fighting for their interests they will vote your tush out of office in a nano-second. For historical reference see Winston Churchill election of 1945 and President George H.W. Bush in 1992.

There's video at the link.

North Carolina Amendment 1 Wins in Landslide Vote for Traditional Marriage

The Associated Press reports, "NC voters approve amendment on gay marriage."

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — North Carolina voters approved a constitutional amendment on Tuesday defining marriage solely as a union between a man and a woman, making it the 30th state to adopt such a ban.

With 35 percent of precincts reporting Tuesday, unofficial returns showed the amendment passing with about 58 percent of the vote to 42 percent against.

In the final days before the vote, members of President Barack Obama's cabinet expressed support for gay marriage and former President Bill Clinton recorded phone messages urging voters to reject the amendment. Opponents also held marches, ran TV ads and gave speeches, including one by Jay Bakker, son of televangelists Jim Bakker and the late Tammy Faye Bakker.

Meanwhile, supporters had run their own ad campaigns and church leaders urged Sunday congregations to vote for the amendment. The Rev. Billy Graham, who at 93 remains influential even though his last crusade was in 2005, was featured in full-page newspaper ads supporting the amendment.

Both sides spent a combined $3 million on their campaigns.

And at the Raleigh News & Observer, "Latest results show marriage amendment up 60 percent to 40 percent":

RALEIGH North Carolina has become the 31st state to add an amendment on marriage to its constitution, with voters banning same-sex marriage and barring legal recognition of unmarried couples by state and local governments.

North Carolina is the last state in the south to add such an amendment, and supporters hoped for a resounding victory.

Incomplete returns show the amendment up 59.72 percent to 40.28 percent. Some large counties, including Durham and Mecklenburg have not reported results.

Primary turnout was heavy. Though there were many other races on the ballot, including primaries for statewide offices and congressional seats, the amendment appeared to drive much of the political discussion.

Marriage rights for gay couples has been a topic of national debate this year, and North Carolina’s amendment and the campaigns for and against it drew international attention.

North Carolinians think of the state as progressive, but that’s within the context of the rest of the South, said Andrew Taylor, a political scientist at N.C. State University. “This is a socially conservative state,” he said.

The state has a 16-year-old law banning same-sex marriage.

At least two other states will be voting on gay marriage rights in November. Minnesota has a constitutional amendment on its ballot. Maine has a referendum to allow same-sex marriage. Voters in Maryland and Washington state may be asked to affirm new state laws allowing same-sex marriage.

Money from national interest groups poured into North Carolina. The National Organization for Marriage contributed $425,000 to the Vote for Marriage campaign, according to the latest reports, and the Human Rights Campaign and its affiliates contributed nearly $500,000 to the opposition Coalition to Protect All N.C. Families.

Vote for Marriage raised more than $1 million, and the Coalition to Protect All N.C. Families raised more than $2 million.

And now the progs are having epic hissy fits on Twitter, for example, Chris Kromm, "NEWS: NC officially joins ranks of bigoted states whose neanderthal laws will be overturned by courts in coming years."

And lesbian radical Pam Spaulding is on Twitter as well. The cries of bigotry and homophobia are going to be deafening.

More on this later.

UPDATE: That didn't take long. See Daily Kos, "The bigots win: North Carolina passes Amendment One."

More at Twitchy, "Liberals freak out over North Carolina gay marriage ban."

Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana Loses GOP Primary to Challenger Richard Mourdock

It's going to be an interesting night.

The New York Times reports, "Mourdock Defeats Lugar in Indiana Senate Primary."

And check Legal Insurrection, "Indiana primary results // Update: NBC calls race for Mourdock."

More here: "NBC News projects Lugar defeated in Indiana primary" (via Memeorandum).

Terrorist Leadership Decapitation and the Organizational Death of al Qaeda

My Spring 2012 issue of International Security came by mail last Tuesday, May 1st --- the one year anniversary of the bin Laden killing.

We also saw President Obama make his secret trip to Afghanistan last Tuesday --- to spike the football for his reelection efforts. So the timing was quite interesting for reading this research paper from Bryan C. Price, "Targeting Top Terrorists: How Leadership Decapitation Contributes to Counterterrorism." Here's this from the introduction:

Late in the evening of May 1, 2011, President Barack Obama announced to the nation that Osama bin Laden was dead. Earlier that day, the president had ordered a team of elite military forces deep into Pakistan to kill the mastermind behind the September 11 terrorist attacks, which had shocked the country and the world nearly ten years before. During his speech, President Obama said that he had told his new director of central intelligence, Leon Panetta, that getting bin Laden was the number one priority in the United States’ counterterrorism strategy against al-Qaida. Upon hearing of bin Laden’s death, Americans broke out in spontaneous celebration, and pundits immediately began speculating about its symbolic and operational importance. But what does bin Laden’s death mean, if anything, for the future of al-Qaida? More broadly, what does it mean when terrorist groups experience leadership decapitation?

Decapitation tactics, which are designed to kill or capture the key leader or leaders of a terrorist group, feature prominently in the counterterrorism strategies of many states, including Israel and the United States. Some scholars argue that targeting the group’s leadership reduces its operational capability by eliminating its most highly skilled members and forcing the group to divert valuable time and limited resources to protect its leaders. Decapitation tactics are also intended to disrupt the terrorist group’s organizational routine and deter others from assuming power. Scholars have credited these tactics with creating intra-organizational turmoil and even organizational collapse, most notably, the demise of the Kurdistan People’s Party and the Shining Path following the arrests of their leaders. Despite questions about the legality and moral legitimacy of targeted assassinations, the United States has expanded, rather than contracted, its targeted killing program since President Obama arrived in offce. In early 2010, the U.S. government even authorized the lethal targeting of Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen living in Yemen. This unprecedented decision was fraught with constitutionality concerns about due process. Yet, five months after the bin Laden operation and amid criticism about the disregard of the United States for international sovereignty, a U.S. drone fired a Hellfire missile at al-Awlaki in a remote region inside Yemen, killing him instantly.

Domestic audiences and leadership decapitation an appealing counterterrorism tactic for a variety of reasons, but most scholars argue that it is ineffective at best and counterproductive at worst. Whereas proponents of decapitation highlight cases in which the tactic has contributed to the organizational collapse of terrorist groups, critics counter with examples in which it has increased and intensified terrorist activity. Critics argue that targeted killings are both morally and ethically wrong and warn of a backlash effect: rather than reducing the terrorist threat, leadership decapitation is likely to increase the number of willing recruits for terrorist groups to exploit, allowing these groups to grow in size and popularity. Decapitation tactics may be prominent in Israel and the United States, detractors say, but that does not mean they are necessarily effective. Israel arguably has the most liberal and robust targeted killing policy of any state, yet one scholar concludes that “no compelling evidence exists that targeted killings have reduced the terrorist threat against Israel.”

Keep reading.

Price claims that leadership decapitation is a significant factor in the decline and mortality of terrorist organizations. It's a great piece. Particularly good is the theoretical discussion of organizational cultures (pp. 14-23) and also the summary and conclusions --- where Price indicates how the killing of Osama bin Laden is a bigger victory for U.S. counterterror policies than would be expected from existing theories of the decline and defeat of terror groups.

So, yeah, President Obama can be rightly proud to have ordered the mission at Abbottabad, although he might lay off his excessive use of the first-person singular pronoun.

Florida is Crucial Battleground in Swing State Campaigns

An excellent analysis at the Los Angeles Times, "Fractious Florida weighs heavily on presidential campaigns":

TAMPA, Fla. — No state is more crucial to Mitt Romney's chances of winning the White House than Florida, and no issue here is more important than the economy.

That dynamic played out recently when Vice President Joe Biden came to the perennial electoral vote battleground to promote the Obama administration's environmental record by riding an airboat through the Everglades.

The Romney camp responded with a stinging assault on President Obama's "failed" economic policies. The targets: a Florida jobless rate that exceeds the national average, painfully high gasoline prices, rising healthcare costs and one of the worst housing collapses in the country. The environment wasn't even mentioned.

"The tough economic climate in Florida is like a giant anchor around Obama's ankles," said Florida strategist Alberto Martinez, a senior Romney campaign advisor.

Long a powerful magnet for Northern retirees and tourist hordes from around the world, Florida is an economic laggard this election year, which helps explain why Obama chose to begin his reelection campaign instead in Ohio and Virginia, two other must-wins for Romney, which are faring better economically than Florida.

From the sultry Latin-infused tip of the peninsula to the pine woods panhandle that juts into Dixie, deserted storefronts and empty commercial buildings languish across the state. Weeds choke the abandoned streets and vacant lots of so-called zombie subdivisions, remnants of a speculative bubble that continues to depress the housing market and voters' mood. In Tampa, where Romney and his running mate will be crowned at this summer's nominating convention, home prices just hit another new low.

Jobs are coming back. But in a familiar pattern, they don't always match those lost in the recession. Last month, more than 3,300 applicants showed up for 400 new positions at the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel & Casino in Tampa, many of them low-paying service jobs.

"We're starting to see seeds of recovery, but it's way late and way slower than it should have been," said Martinez, the Romney advisor.

Obama planted his flag in the nation's fourth-most populous state years ago and never left. As president, he's been a frequent visitor, making two trips last month. His campaign has opened more than a dozen Florida offices, including a bustling storefront down the street from the Republican-controlled Capitol in Tallahassee. If both sides engage fully, total campaign spending in the state could reach $150 million.

In 2008, Obama carried Florida by 2.8 percentage points, well below his national popular vote margin, in what was "a perfect environment" for him, according to Steven Schale, who ran the state campaign that year.

"Because our economy is so dependent on other people spending money, when Americans have money, our booms last longer. And when they don't, our busts take longer to get out of," said Schale, an informal reelection advisor. "There's not a damn thing the president can do to change that."

Recent public opinion surveys give Romney a statistically insignificant lead in the state and show that Florida voters view him more favorably than those in other big swing states. That may reflect the estimated $18 million that the Romney forces spent to win the Florida primary, a pivotal fight in the nomination campaign.

Organizationally, though, Romney is playing catch-up. His entire Florida team was dispatched to other states after the January victory and is just now reassembling.

"Obama was opening up storefronts all over the state, while the Republican candidates were duking it out in places that don't matter in the general election," said another Romney advisor in Florida, requesting anonymity to speak candidly about the campaign. "If you injected me with sodium pentothal and asked me what one thing bothers me most, it's what the Obama campaign has done at the ground level."

But sharp restrictions on new voter registration, imposed last year by the Republican-led Legislature, have slowed Obama's efforts to expand the electorate to make up for those who have soured on him. And even Democratic strategists say Romney's team has enough time to put together a successful statewide operation.

One potential wild card: Sen. Marco Rubio, a charismatic Cuban American and leading vice presidential contender. He could help with the state's Latinos, about 15% of the electorate, and possibly tip the state to the Republicans.

I like Rubio, so let's see if he gets the VP nod.

See also USA Today, "Swing states' poll: Big challenges loom for Obama, Romney."

Speaking of crucial swing states, the Times has this on that video up top, "Mitt Romney campaign has awkward moments in Ohio: He stays on message about the economy but makes no effort to challenge a remark that President Obama should be tried for treason."

That's a nontroversy.

Anarchy 101: Wisconsin Democratic Primary Voters Go to Polls to Choose Challenger for Governor

Folks should check Legal Insurrection throughout the day for coverage of today's elections, especially the Wisconsin primary. See: "Wisconsin Primary Tuesday to decide Scott Walker opponent."

Plus, "Tuesday: one of the busiest election days of 2012."

Check Althouse too, for example, "'Together, let's break the glass ceiling to the Governor's office'."

VIDEO: Michelle Malkin, "Anarchy 101: How Wisconsin’s Left embraces chaos (promo video)."

Pamela Geller Slams Obama's Foreign Policy on Hannity's

See: "VIDEO: Pamela Geller on Sean Hannity Obama's Failed Afghan Strategy and His Surrender in the War on Terror."

Suzanne Somers Discusses Sex and Good Health on Piers Morgan's

Well, it's been 30 years since her superstar turn in "Three's Company." And she's hopelessly liberal, but I like Piers Morgan's show, despite the criticism he gets pretty regularly from the right. (I think he did a great job covering the Trayvon Martin story, seeking to be an objective source of news.)

Police Investigating Islamic School Over Curriculum Comparing Jews to Nazis

The story's at Canada's National Post, but Blazing Cat Fur broke it first.

See Five Feet of Fury, "‘BlazingCatFur gets results’: my husband breaks another story that gets picked up by the mainstream."

Why Colleges Don't Teach the Federalist Papers

Bruce Kesler has Peter Berkowitz's essay at Maggie's Farm.

It's behind the subscription wall but check the top result at Google ("one day free pass") or Memeorandum.

And here's a key passage:

It would be difficult to overstate the significance of The Federalist for understanding the principles of American government and the challenges that liberal democracies confront early in the second decade of the 21st century. Yet despite the lip service they pay to liberal education, our leading universities can't be bothered to require students to study The Federalist—or, worse, they oppose such requirements on moral, political or pedagogical grounds. Small wonder it took so long for progressives to realize that arguments about the constitutionality of ObamaCare are indeed serious.

The masterpiece of American political thought originated as a series of newspaper articles published under the pseudonym Publius in New York between October 1787 and August 1788 by framers Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison. The aim was to make the case for ratification of the new constitution, which had been agreed to in September 1787 by delegates to the federal convention meeting in Philadelphia over four months of remarkable discussion, debate and deliberation about self-government.

By the end of 1788, a total of 85 essays had been gathered in two volumes under the title The Federalist. Written at a brisk clip and with the crucial vote in New York hanging in the balance, the essays formed a treatise on constitutional self-government for the ages.

The Federalist deals with the reasons for preserving the union, the inefficacy of the existing federal government under the Articles of Confederation, and the conformity of the new constitution to the principles of liberty and consent. It covers war and peace, foreign affairs, commerce, taxation, federalism and the separation of powers. It provides a detailed examination of the chief features of the legislative, executive and judicial branches. It advances its case by restatement and refutation of the leading criticisms of the new constitution. It displays a level of learning, political acumen and public-spiritedness to which contemporary scholars, journalists and politicians can but aspire. And to this day it stands as an unsurpassed source of insight into the Constitution's text, structure and purposes.

At Harvard, at least, all undergraduate political-science majors will receive perfunctory exposure to a few Federalist essays in a mandatory course their sophomore year. But at Yale, Princeton, Stanford and Berkeley, political-science majors can receive their degrees without encountering the single surest analysis of the problems that the Constitution was intended to solve and the manner in which it was intended to operate.

Most astonishing and most revealing is the neglect of The Federalist by graduate schools and law schools. The political science departments at Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford and Berkeley—which set the tone for higher education throughout the nation and train many of the next generation's professors—do not require candidates for the Ph.D. to study The Federalist. And these universities' law schools (Princeton has no law school), which produce many of the nation's leading members of the bar and bench, do not require their students to read, let alone master, The Federalist's major ideas and main lines of thought.

I teach Federalists 10 and 51 every semester, as they are included in my textbook (and any decent introductory American government text should have them, really). I also bought a paperback copy of The Federalist Papers when I was an undergraduate. It seemed like a cool thing to do.

Hey, there's also an excellent introductory text focusing on James Madison's contributions, Republic at Risk: Self Interest in American Politics.

Also at Power Line, "Papers? We Don't Need No Stinking [Federalist] Papers!"

Angela Merkel Rejects Calls to Weaken Fiscal Discipline, Faces Fight for Eurozone's Future

At Telegraph UK, "German Chancellor Angela Merkel faces a fight for the eurozone's future":

Angela Merkel could be forgiven if she had taken to her bunker on Monday. It was, after all, the 67th anniversary of the German surrender to end the Second World War in Europe.

There is little prospect of the German chancellor putting her hands up and losing the economic war she has been waging with her eurozone partners for two years now.

Austerity Rules OK might be the graffiti shorthand for the debt and public spending reduction programmes that have formed the core of the Merkel approach to keep the eurozone intact and the markets on side.

The message that came through strongly from France and Greece at the weekend was that austerity does not rule OK.

Mrs Merkel was effectively told to "get lost" by one of the new political leaders in Greece – Syriza party leader Alexis Tsipras – who's plea was to end the "bail-out barbarism".

Mrs Merkel or the markets are more likely to tell Greece to "get lost".

"A Greek eurozone exit is on the cards although the probability and timing of such an event is uncertain," said Tristan Cooper, sovereign debt analyst at Fidelity Worldwide Investment.

The election results were hardly a surprise for either the markets or European leaders.

Continue reading.

RELATED: At Der Spiegel, "Savings vs. Stimulus: Pragmatism Likely in Merkel-Hollande Relationship."

Kate Beckinsale: 'Republicans, Get In My Vagina!'

It's a parody, at Pat Dollard's, "Kate Beckinsale Asks Republicans to Get In Her Vagina."

Vancouver City

Another time lapse video, via Theo Spark:

Spain Bank Bailout is Latest Eurozone Financial Setback

Shoot, let them fail. The bailouts have gone on long enough.

At Zero Hedge, "The Spanish Bank Bailout Begins."

And Telegraph UK, "New eurozone crisis looms as Spain prepares bail-out":

A new eurozone crisis is looming as Spain signalled on Monday it was ready to bail out ailing banks after markets shrugged off the election results in France and Greece.

Prime minister Marian Rajoy indicated the Government was ready to intervene to save banks wrestling with the collapse of the housing market.

Bankia, Spain's fourth biggest bank, is the first in line for state aid. Rodrigo Rato, chairman and former IMF managing director, swiftly resigned after it was disclosed the finance ministry was preparing to refinance the bank and introduce legislation to protect the balance sheets of others.

Spain, which also signalled it could dock its only aircraft carrier to save €30m a year, is already struggling to cope with an austerity drive that has pushed the jobless total up to nearly 25pc of the workforce.

Mr Rajoy insisted that any bank bail-out would not compromise the tough targets set by Brussels to reduce the budget deficit.
Peter Kenny, managing director at Knight Capital, said Spain's action was positive because "it's them taking ownership of their own issues".

Fears of a fall-out in financial markets after the election results in France and Greece were short-lived. Shares and the euro recovered after initial falls as investors reasoned any policy changes in the eurozone recovery programme were some way off.

But the turmoil in Greece produced by a backlash against a tough austerity programme and the failure of early efforts to form a coalition government heightened speculation the country would be forced out of the eurozone.

Citi's European economics team said there was a "rising risk of a Greek exit from the euro within the next 12 to 18 months."

Also at NYT, "Executive Chairman Resigns at Bankia, the Troubled Spanish Real Estate Lender."

Obama's New Campaign Ad, 'Go' — Hey, What Happened ObamaCare and Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform?

At ABC's OTUS blog, "New Obama ad strikes ‘don't blame me' tone on economy":

The ad is notable in part for what it doesn't show: Romney never appears, and opposition to Obama is reduced to a few images of Tea Party rallies, including one shot of a demonstrator in colonial garb with a "Shut 'Er Down" sign. Obama's two signature domestic policy achievements, his health care overhaul and the Dodd-Frank rewrite of Wall Street rules, are missing, as is the $800-billion-dollar stimulus package he championed as necessary to revive the economy.

And check The Fix, "Obama makes case in major swing state ad ‘Go,’ launches $25 million ad buy."

U.S. Disrupts New Jetliner Bomb Plot in Yemen — White House Gets AP to Hold Off Reporting for Intelligence Reasons

The Wall Street Journal has the main story, "Jetliner Bomb Plot Is Foiled."

It's a good thing.

Al Qaeda operatives are obviously working hard at deploying detection-proof explosives on U.S. jetliners. What's intriguing is the administration's coordination with the Associated Press in embargoing the story. Politico's got that, "W.H. embargoed Al Qaeda bomb threat" (via Memeorandum). And AP's report is here, "US: CIA thwarts new al-Qaida underwear bomb plot":

The operation unfolded even as the White House and Department of Homeland Security assured the American public that they knew of no al-Qaida plots against the U.S. around the anniversary of bin Laden's death.

"We have no credible information that terrorist organizations, including al-Qaida, are plotting attacks in the U.S. to coincide with the anniversary of bin Laden's death," White House press secretary Jay Carney said on April 26.

On May 1, the Department of Homeland Security said, "We have no indication of any specific, credible threats or plots against the U.S. tied to the one-year anniversary of bin Laden's death."

The AP learned about the thwarted plot last week but agreed to White House and CIA requests not to publish it immediately because the sensitive intelligence operation was still under way. Once officials said those concerns were allayed, the AP decided to disclose the plot Monday despite requests from the Obama administration to wait for an official announcement Tuesday.

U.S. officials, who were briefed on the operation, insisted on anonymity to discuss the case, which the U.S. has never officially acknowledged.

It's not clear who built the bomb, but, because of its sophistication and its similarity to the Christmas bomb, authorities suspected it was the work of master bomb maker Ibrahim Hassan al-Asiri. Al-Asiri constructed the first underwear bomb and two others that al-Qaida built into printer cartridges and shipped to the U.S. on cargo planes in 2010.

The report goes on to indicate that "The operation is an intelligence victory for the United States and a reminder of al-Qaida's ambitions, despite the death of bin Laden and other senior leaders."

Right.

An intelligence victory --- and a political victory for Barack "Gutsy Call" Obama and his new national security homeboy creds.

And if there's any doubt about the political coordination with the Obama-enabling media, recall from last year: "Good news: GutsyCall.com now redirects to Obama campaign site."

France, Greece, and the End of the Euro

From Jeremy Warner, at Telegraph UK, "Hollande wins and the end of the euro draws nearer" (via RealClearWorld).

I was thinking along these lines yesterday: "Socialist François Hollande Wins French Presidential Election."

RELATED: See what you can make of Paul Krugman's argument, "Those Revolting Europeans" (via Memeorandum). Krugman floats the notion of a collapse of the Euro, but only as a straw man to browbeat Germany to drop its insistence on austerity. In other words, Germany --- and France --- should end the pretense of fiscal restraint and start spending like there's no tomorrow. And Germany especially should be the market of last resort for depressed-economy exports, thus allowing its currency to appreciate, and then, ineluctably, making its own exports less competitive. Alas, Krugman wants the market only when it fits his agenda of the ever-spending welfare state. Obviously Berlin's not down with that redistributionist program.

Again, check that Memeorandum link for more. Krugman's getting a lot of huzzahs from the progs all fired up with the socialist victory and the impending gush of socialist red ink.

American Airlines Winds Down AAirpass: Unlimited Frequent Flyer Program Has Too-Frequent Flyers

This is an amazing story.

I love to fly and American Airlines is my favorite carrier, but I never imagined anything like this. When something's too good to be true it's not likely to last as long as this program, and AA's pulling the plug as aggressively as it can.

At the Los Angeles Times, "The frequent fliers who flew too much":

There are frequent fliers, and then there are people like Steven Rothstein and Jacques Vroom.

Both men bought tickets that gave them unlimited first-class travel for life on American Airlines. It was almost like owning a fleet of private jets.

Passes in hand, Rothstein and Vroom flew for business. They flew for pleasure. They flew just because they liked being on planes. They bypassed long lines, booked backup itineraries in case the weather turned, and never worried about cancellation fees. Flight crews memorized their names and favorite meals.

Each had paid American more than $350,000 for an unlimited AAirpass and a companion ticket that allowed them to take someone along on their adventures. Both agree it was the best purchase they ever made, one that completely redefined their lives.

In the 2009 film "Up in the Air," the loyal American business traveler played by George Clooney was showered with attention after attaining 10 million frequent flier miles.

Rothstein and Vroom were not impressed.

"I can't even remember when I cracked 10 million," said Vroom, 67, a big, amiable Texan, who at last count had logged nearly four times as many. Rothstein, 61, has notched more than 30 million miles.

But all the miles they and 64 other unlimited AAirpass holders racked up went far beyond what American had expected. As its finances began deteriorating a few years ago, the carrier took a hard look at the AAirpass program.

Heavy users, including Vroom and Rothstein, were costing it millions of dollars in revenue, the airline concluded.

The AAirpass system had rules. A special "revenue integrity unit" was assigned to find out whether any of these rules had been broken, and whether the passes that were now such a drag on profits could be revoked.

Rothstein, Vroom and other AAirpass holders had long been treated like royalty. Now they were targets of an investigation.

******

When American introduced the AAirpass in 1981, it saw a chance to raise millions of dollars for expansion at a time of record-high interest rates.

It was, and still is, offered in a variety of formats, including prepaid blocks of miles. But the marquee item was the lifetime unlimited AAirpass, which started at $250,000. Pass holders earned frequent flier miles on every trip and got lifetime memberships to the Admirals Club, American's VIP lounges. For an extra $150,000, they could buy a companion pass. Older fliers got discounts based on their age.

"We thought originally it would be something that firms would buy for top employees," said Bob Crandall, American's chairman and chief executive from 1985 to 1998. "It soon became apparent that the public was smarter than we were."

The unlimited passes were bought mostly by wealthy individuals, including baseball Hall-of-Famer Willie Mays, America's Cup skipper Dennis Conner and computer magnate Michael Dell.

Mike Joyce of Chicago bought his in 1994 after winning a $4.25-million settlement after a car accident.

In one 25-day span this year, Joyce flew round trip to London 16 times, flights that would retail for more than $125,000. He didn't pay a dime.

"I love Rome, I love Sydney, I love Athens," Joyce said by phone from the Admirals Club at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York. "I love Vegas and Frisco."

Rothstein had loved flying since his years at Brown University in Rhode Island, where he would buy a $99 weekend pass on Mohawk Air and fly to Buffalo, N.Y., just for a sandwich.

He bought his AAirpass in 1987 for his work in investment banking. After he added a companion pass two years later, it "kind of took hold of me," said Rothstein, a heavyset man with a kind smile.

He was airborne almost every other day. If a friend mentioned a new exhibit at the Louvre, Rothstein thought nothing of jetting from his Chicago home to San Francisco to pick her up and then fly to Paris together.

In July 2004, for example, Rothstein flew 18 times, visiting Nova Scotia, New York, Miami, London, Los Angeles, Maine, Denver and Fort Lauderdale, Fla., some of them several times over. The complexity of such itineraries would stump most travelers; happily for AAirpass holders, American provided elite agents able to solve the toughest booking puzzles.

They could help AAirpass customers make multiple reservations in case they missed a flight, or nab the last seat on the only plane leaving during a snowstorm. Some say agents even procured extra elbow room by booking an empty seat using a phony name on companion passes.

"I'd book it as Extra Lowe," said Peter Lowe, a motivational speaker from West Palm Beach, Fla. "They told me how to do it."

Vroom, a former mail-order catalog consultant, used his AAirpass to attend all his son's college football games in Maine. He built up so many frequent flier miles that he'd give them away, often to AIDS sufferers so they could visit family. Crew members knew him by name.

"There was one flight attendant, Pierre, who knew exactly what I wanted," Vroom said. "He'd bring me three salmon appetizers, no dessert and a glass of champagne, right after takeoff. I didn't even have to ask."

Creative uses seemed limitless. When bond broker Willard May of Round Rock, Texas, was forced into retirement after a run-in with federal securities regulators in the early 1990s, he turned to his trusty AAirpass to generate income. Using his companion ticket, he began shuttling a Dallas couple back and forth to Europe for $2,000 a month.

"For years, that was all the flying I did," said May, 81. "It's how I got the bills paid."

In 1990, the airline raised the price of an unlimited AAirpass with companion to $600,000. In 1993, it was bumped to $1.01 million. In 1994, American stopped selling unlimited passes altogether.

Cable TV executive Leo Hindery Jr. bought a five-year AAirpass in 1991, with an option to upgrade to lifetime after three years. American later "asked me not to convert," he said. "They were gracious. They said the program had been discontinued and if I gave my pass back, they'd give me back my money."

Hindery declined, even rebuffing a personal appeal by American's Crandall (which the executive said he did not recall). To date, he has accumulated 11.5 million miles on a pass that cost him about $500,000, including an age discount and credit from his five-year pass.

"It was a lot of money at the time," Hindery said. "But once you get past that, you forget it."

In 2004, American offered the unlimited AAirpass one last time, in the Neiman-Marcus Christmas catalog. At $3 million, plus a companion pass for $2 million more, none sold.

There's lots more at the link.

What a life that would be, able to lift off and go anywhere, anytime like that.

Like I said, it's too good to be true.

Greek Voters Oust Ruling Parties in Backlash Against Austerity

The Wall Street Journal offers a dire headline, "Greeks Court Chaos in Mass Protest Vote: New Parties Vow to Redo Bailout Terms; Prospects for Coalition Rule Look Dim" (at Google):

ATHENS — Greek voters on Sunday delivered a stinging rejection of the country's two incumbent parties—the Socialist, or Pasok, party and the conservative New Democracy—and the austerity program they support, raising the specter of political instability that could ultimately challenge the country's future in the euro zone.

More than 60% of the popular vote went to smaller left- and right-wing parties that have campaigned against the austerity program Greece must implement in exchange for continued financing from its European partners and the International Monetary Fund.

With the political landscape dramatically recast, difficult talks for a multiparty coalition were set to follow the election of Greece's most fragmented Parliament since the restoration of democracy and the fall of the military junta in 1974. But the prospect of a viable government emerging from these talks looked dim, raising the possibility of fresh elections before long—possibly by the middle of next month.

Greek voters' resounding rejection of austerity came the same day that the French elected François Hollande as president, giving that country a Socialist leader who has pledged to shift the burden of hardship onto the rich and resolve the protracted euro sovereign-debt crisis by softening the current prescription of fiscal stringency.

With more than 95% of the vote counted, Greece's two mainstream parties looked set to secure just 150 seats in the 300-seat Parliament, which would prevent them from forming a governing coalition on their own. The projection includes a 50-seat bonus awarded to the conservative New Democracy party which holds a slim lead with 19.1% of the vote and 109 seats.

The two parties garnered just under 33% of the vote between them, a sharp drop from the combined 77% they won in the previous election less than three years ago.

At least seven parties, most of which reject austerity policies, were poised to clear the 3% threshold needed to enter Parliament—meaning the next Greek government will have difficulty implementing the reform program demanded by the country's European and international creditors in exchange for funding a continued bailout for Greece.

In a surprise result, the Coalition of the Radical Left, or Syriza, which seeks to annul the austerity program, saw its share of the vote more than triple from the 2009 elections, to 16.4% of the vote and 51 seats—making it the second-largest party in Parliament—Interior Ministry projections showed.

Pasok took the brunt of voter anger, slipping to third place, with 13.5% of the vote and 41 seats, its worst showing in more than 30 years.

The far-right, anti-immigrant Golden Dawn party, with an estimated 6.9% of the vote, or 21 seats, will enter Parliament for the first time.

If final results confirm initial projections, a bipartisan coalition of New Democracy and Pasok is unlikely to deliver a viable government, capable of passing fresh reforms demanded by international creditors.

And here's this, from the editors at WSJ, "The New Greek Extremism":

As for the rise of the extremist fringes, this should serve as a warning of what happens in countries where mainstream parties fail. It's too soon to start making comparisons to the interwar years of the last century, when Fascism, Communism and Nazism all found their political footholds. But that's the scenario Europe may someday risk again if its centrist parties continue to fail.

RTWT.

Also, at Telegraph UK, "Angry Greeks send a message by punishing parties of austerity." And from The Guardian, "Greek voters vent anger towards austerity at ballot box: Parties that passed unpopular belt-tightening measures punished by electorate..."

A Reinvigorated Monarchy: Former Prime Minister John Major Reveals His Admiration for Britain's Young Royals, William and Kate

I like this clip, and I've been thinking about how the monarchy's been revived for some time now.

At CNN: "Exclusive: Former PM: William and Kate reinvigorated monarchy."

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and 9/11 Co-Defendants Defy Guantanamo Trial, Turn Courtroom Into Circus

LAT has the mainstream story, "Sept. 11 terrorism trial at Guantanamo gets off to a silent start."

But see Pamela's report, "911 Trial Muslim Terrorists: "I spit on their Graves" KSM and co-jihadists mock victims --- turn courtroom into circus."

No matter how the enmedia hides and obfuscates and shields the enemy and their ideology in the cause of Islam, the truth is unavoidable. Bloody mass murder while ....... praying. And their lawyer, a full burka'ed woman is demanding that all the women in the courtroom be attired in cloth coffins.

Obama say, "respect it!"

#Occupy Shill Robert Reich Says Socialism Not the Answer, Wealth Redistribution Is — Wait, What?

Robert Reich, the former Clinton administration Labor Secretary and Professor of Public Policy at UC Berkeley, is out with a bizarre commentary at the Huffington Post, "The Answer Isn't Socialism; It's Capitalism That Better Spreads the Benefits of the Productivity Revolution" (via Memeorandum):

The last great surge in productivity occurred between 1870 and 1928, when the technologies of the first industrial revolution were combined with steam power and electricity, mass produced in giant companies enjoying vast economies of scale, and supplied and distributed over a widening system of rails. That ended abruptly in the Great Crash of 1929, when income and wealth had become so concentrated at the top (the owners and financiers of these vast combines) that most people couldn't pay for all these new products and services without going deeply and hopelessly into debt -- resulting in a bubble that loudly and inevitably popped.

If that sounds familiar, it should. A similar thing happened between 1980 and 2007, when productivity revolution of computers, software, and, eventually, the Internet spawned a new economy along with great fortunes. (It's not coincidental that 1928 and 2007 mark the two peaks of income concentration in America over the last hundred years, in which the top 1 percent raked in over 23 percent of total income.)

But here's the big difference. During the Depression decade of the 1930s, the nation reorganized itself so that the gains from growth were far more broadly distributed. The National Labor Relations Act of 1935 recognized unions' rights to collectively bargain, and imposed a duty on employers to bargain in good faith. By the 1950s, a third of all workers in the United States were unionized, giving them the power to demand some of the gains from growth. Meanwhile, Social Security, unemployment insurance, and worker's compensation spread a broad safety net. The forty-hour workweek with time-and-a-half for overtime also helped share the work and spread the gains, as did a minimum wage. In 1965, Medicare and Medicaid broadened access to health care. And a progressive income tax, reaching well over 70 percent on the highest incomes, also helped ensure that the gains were spread fairly.

This time, though, the nation has taken no similar steps. Quite the contrary: A resurgent right insists on even more tax breaks for corporations and the rich, massive cuts in public spending that will destroy what's left of our safety nets, including Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid, fewer rights for organized labor, more deregulation of labor markets, and a lower (or no) minimum wage.

This is, quite simply, nuts.

And this is why a second Obama administration, should there be one, must focus its attention on more broadly distributing the gains from growth. This doesn't mean "redistributing" from rich to poor, as in a zero-sum game. To the contrary, the rich will do far better with a smaller share of a robust, growing economy than they're doing with a large share of an economy that's barely moving forward.

This will require real tax reform -- not just a "Buffett" minimal tax but substantially higher marginal rates and more brackets at the top, with a capital gains rate matching the income-tax rate. It also means a larger Earned Income Tax Credit, whose benefits extend high into the middle class. That will enable many Americans to move to a 35-hour workweek without losing ground -- thereby making room for more jobs.

It means Medicare for all rather than an absurdly-costly system that relies on private for-profit insurers and providers.

It will require limiting executive salaries and empowering workers to get a larger share of corporate profits. The Employee Free Choice Act should be an explicit part of the second-term agenda.

It will require strict limits on the voracious, irresponsible behavior of Wall Street, from which we've all suffered. The Glass-Steagall Act must be resurrected (the so-called Volcker Rule is more ridden with holes than cheese), and the big banks broken up.

And it will necessitate a public educational system - including early child education - second to none, and available to all our young people.

We don't need socialism. We need a capitalism that works for the vast majority. The productivity revolution should be making our lives better -- not poorer and more insecure. And it will do that when we have the political will to spread its benefits.

For such a smart man it's amazing how dense Reich can be. Look at that policy agenda he just laid out. Not socialism? Give me a break. Reich just described modern "democratic socialism" to a T. That's the creeping socialism of the European welfare state, the model that's frankly bankrupting the nations of the EU. Mark Steyn wrote precisely of the Reich model shortly after Obama came to office: "The Europeanization of America."

Of course, it hardly helps Reich's case that the occupy movement is one big socialist revolutionary project --- and that he's an abject shill for the movement. I've written about this over and over again, for example, "Manifesto: Occupy for the Revolution," and "Occupy Wall Street: The Communist Movement Reborn."

Reich is defining socialism down --- or, more precisely, redefining capitalism up to a statist redistributionist economic system. Classic, isn't it? Words mean only what progressives want them to mean.

Added: From Elizabeth Foley, guest blogging at Instapundit, "ROBERT REICH: THE ANSWER ISN’T SOCIALISM BUT MORE WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION: Er, um, so wouldn’t that actually be more like communism? You can’t make stuff like this up."

New Romney Ad Slams the Obama Economy: 'Silence'

I like this.

The Hill reports, "Romney ad: Millions ‘suffering in silence’ from Obama’s economy."

Fahd Mohammed Ahmed al Quso Killed in Drone Strike in Yemen — Al Qaeda Terrorist Tied to Bombing of USS Cole

Yay, good riddance to the f-ker.

At The Jawa Report, "Yemen: Top al-Qaeda Leader Wanted In USS Cole Bombing, Fahd al-Quso, Killed in Airstrike?", and Long War Journal, "USS Cole bomber killed in US drone strike in Yemen."

Also at the New York Times, "Militant Tied to U.S.S. Cole Bombing Said to Be Killed."

Research Update: Sexual Attraction Will Usually Interfere With Male-Female Platonic Relationships — Especially For Men!

Well, I can attest to this by personal experience, LOL!

At London's Daily Mail, "Sex WILL always get in the way of the male-female relationship." (Click on image below for full size.)

It is perfectly normal to have friendships with the opposite sex and most people would swear that they are platonic.

But according to a new study, there is nearly always attraction between male and female friends and the most common cost is dissatisfaction with current romantic partners.

Researchers from University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire also found that in a test group of 400 adults, if there were feelings of attraction expressed from only one member of the friendship, it was most often from the man.

Associate professor of psychology and lead author of the study, April Bleske-Rechek believes that because platonic inter-sex relationships are a relatively new concept in the history of human evolution, men are still controlled by their mating instincts.

The participants in the study, which was split into two parts, ranged in age between 18-52 and the findings were reported in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships.

The first experiment split 88 pairs of friends up into different rooms and without asking anyone to identify themselves proposed a series of questions.

This exercise aimed to glean information about the individuals' attraction to their companions, desire to go on a romantic date and perception of whether their friends were interested in them romantically.

The results showed that men more frequently admitted attraction to their female friends while also overestimating their friend's romantic feelings towards them.

Women on the other hand were less likely to fancy their friends or assume that the males had those kinds of feelings for them.

It's hard out there for a hunk!

ZOMG! New Euro Crisis as French Vote For Return of Ruinous Spending

You gotta love this cover shot from tomorrow's hard-copy at London's Daily Mail, via Twitter:

And here's Daily Mail's report online, "Au revoir President Bling Bling! Sarkozy concedes defeat as Hollande becomes new leader of France."

PREVIOUSLY: "Socialist François Hollande Wins French Presidential Election."

And lots more at Memeorandum.

And check the exuberant coverage at The Guardian, "French president François Hollande promises 'a new start' for Europe," and "French election: Nicolas Sarkozy v François Hollande – live updates and results."

Socialist François Hollande Wins French Presidential Election

See the live blog Telegraph UK, "Hollande defeats Sarkozy to win French presidential election."

And at Los Angeles Times, "Hollande wins French presidential race: Victory could change how Europe tackles debt crisis":

PARIS -- Socialist Francois Hollande was elected president of France on Sunday, defeating conservative incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy in a race that focused heavily on the country's economic woes.

Sarkozy conceded defeat shortly after the polls closed, wishing Hollande "good luck" as the nation's new leader. The results made Sarzoky the first French president in more than three decades to lose a reelection bid.

Partial official results, with about half of the nationwide votes counted, showed Hollande with 50.8% compared with 49.2% for for Sarkozy, the Associated Press said.

Hollande’s victory could also raise further questions about Europe’s economic future, including France’s commitment to reining in its spending while the rest of the 17 countries that use the euro embark on a strict period of belt-tightening. It also throws into doubt the German-French partnership that has led the eurozone's response to its financial problems and was built on the personal relationship between Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Hollande, 57, had been the front-runner in the opinion polls from the beginning of the campaign and scored higher than Sarkozy in the first-round vote two weeks ago. It was the first time an incumbent president had lost the first ballot, in which a total of 10 candidates stood.

In the run-up to Sunday's final vote, however, the gap between the two men closed from 10 percentage points to just 4, suggesting a last-minute surge of support for Sarkozy, who surveys showed was the most unpopular president ever to run for reelection.

To the very end, Sarkozy, 56, was convinced that despite the devastating opinion polls showing him trailing badly he would snatch victory from the jaws of his predicted defeat.

Also at Der Spiegel, "Voters Say 'Au Revoir' to Sarkozy: Socialist Hollande to Become Next French President."

Plus, recall the comments from Sultan Knish, "Niggas in Paris."

And more video at Agence France-Presse, here.

I'm not so pessimistic on French life chances following the vote. The socialists will just continue to do what France has been doing for decades --- consolidate state power over the individual. The most important implication will be for the EU as a whole. The common European project is in tatters and could very well fall apart if Hollande adopts a nationalist agenda vis-a-vis the EU. That in turn depends on how Germany reacts to the election. It's a Franco-German condominium that holds up the entire European edifice. If Berlin moves to promote more austerity, for the French as well as the EU all together, we can see expect even more strains on political and monetary union going forward. I'm not so bullish on the EU continuing forward much longer in its current state. There may be some changes, cutting off some of the more peripheral partners for example to save the core members of the union.

I'll have updates with reactions from around the Internet, so check back...

UPDATE: More at Wall Street Journal and Memeorandum.

And at the New York Times, "France Selects Hollande as President."

MORE: Don't miss this post: "ZOMG! New Euro Crisis as French Vote For Return of Ruinous Spending."

Plus, linked at Atlas Shrugs and Instapundit. Thanks!

Also linked at Fausta's Blog: "France: Hollande in, Ferraris out." Thanks!

Vice President Joe Biden 'Comfortable' With Gay Marriage

Hmm, "comfortable" probably isn't the adjective I'd use. It offers a bit of familiarity with same-sex relations that I don't possess. But hey, Biden's a Democrat, NTTAWWT!!

At the New York Times:

And hey, the progs are all over this, at Think Progress, example, via Memeorandum.

And whoops!

Looks like old Joe "Comfortable" Biden spoke too soon. "VP Joe Biden comes out for marriage equality on Meet the Press; yanked back by Axelrod." Well, I guess old Baracky's not down with the gay radical bung hole jockeys getting hitched. What a pussy!

I'll Have Another Wins Kentucky Derby in Spectacular Come-From-Behind Upset

At the Kentucky Post, "I'll Have Another wins Kentucky Derby."

And at the Los Angeles Times, "I'll Have Another comes from behind to win Kentucky Derby":

LOUISVILLE, Ky. —— A horse few believed in. A jockey with little big-time experience. A very accomplished trainer who had never won a Triple Crown race.

All that's changed is I'll Have Another shocked an incredibly competitive field to win the 138th running of the Kentucky Derby.

On a day when speed was holding up, the Southern California-based horse blew past a tiring Bodemeister in deep stretch to win by 11/2 lengths. It was the third time jockey Mario Gutierrez, 25, has ridden the colt, having previously won the Robert B. Lewis and Santa Anita Derby. It was also the first time a horse has ever won from the 19 post.

A year ago, Mario Gutierrez was the leading rider at Hastings Race Track in Vancouver, Canada, and watched the Kentucky Derby in the jockey's room.

"All jockeys dream they will one day be in the Kentucky Derby," Gutierrez said. "I wasn't thinking it would be the next year."

Not to understate Gutierrez's major race experience, but I'll Have Another's owner, Paul Reddam, put it this way.

"That was the second time Mario rode on the dirt at Churchill Downs and the first time was earlier today," Reddam said. "So we got him the experience he needed."

I'll Have Another was a bargain buy for Reddam. Assistant trainer Dennis O'Neill bought the horse for Reddam for $35,000 and, of course, he was in brother Doug's barn.

But first there was the naming thing. Conventional wisdom would indicate this is a tribute to drinking, but in fact, Reddam has said that his wife is always baking chocolate chip cookies, and when she asks, he says, "I'll have another."

Reddam was quite reserved compared with his trainer, Doug O'Neill, who was whooping and hollering like, well, he'd just won the Kentucky Derby.

"Southern California, baby," O'Neill said. "We're going to Maryland."

O'Neill says he will probably keep I'll Have Another at Churchill Downs and then van him to Maryland for the Preakness in two weeks.

"It's incredible," O'Neill said. "When you tell people you're in the horse racing game, they ask you if you've ever won a Kentucky Derby. Now I can say, 'Yes, I have.'"

Secular Ideologies and the New Intolerance

A phenomenal essay, from Melanie Phillips, at Standpoint, "The New Intolerance."

Four Years Later, America is Not Better Off

Not better off with the Obamunists.

PREVIOUSLY: "Obama Kicks-Off Re-Election Campaign, Attacks Mitt Romney."

UN Special Rapporteur on Rights of Indigenous Peoples: U.S. Must Return Native American Lands

This "special rapporteur" is James Anaya, an extreme radical leftist and professor of human rights law at the University of Arizona.

His UN report is nothing short of a total condemnation of the United States as a racist, imperial oppressor state --- which is exactly what you'd expect from some academic cornball like this. Not a single member of Congress would meet with him during his two week tour of the Native American tribal reservations.

London's Daily Mail has a report, "Could the U.S. give up Mount Rushmore? Iconic site is on list of 'sacred land' UN says must be returned to Native Americans."

The Implosion of the French Right

See David Bell, at The New Republic, "Midnight in Paris."

In the first round of voting on April 22, Sarkozy finished second—the first time a sitting president has done so in the history of the Fifth Republic. In a bid to recover, he has made a cynical attempt to win over the first-round supporters of the National Front’s Marine Le Pen (while formally opposing an actual pact with the party), despite the Front’s deep hostility toward immigrant communities and the European Union, and the fact that its founder (her father, Jean-Marie) had a well-deserved reputation for racism and anti-Semitism. Le Pen is “compatible with the Republic,” he stated soon after the initial voting. Sarkozy’s stunning acknowledgment of Le Pen’s legitimacy can only help her cause: In the days after the first round, nearly two-thirds of Sarkozy voters told pollsters they favored an electoral pact with her party in the legislative elections that will follow soon after the presidential campaign. Le Pen herself clearly wants Sarkozy to lose, declaring that she will cast a blank ballot in the second round. She has called the UMP no different from the Socialists, and, indeed, her nationalist stance offers a starker alternative to the two major parties than they do to each other. Can this alternative achieve major party status? Having helped to dissolve the traditional French right while failing to replace it with a coherent or popular ideology of his own, it now appears possible that Nicolas Sarkozy’s principal legacy will be the rise of Marine Le Pen.

More on Le Pen at Telegraph UK, "French election: Brachay, the village that holds the clues to Marine Le Pen's success."

And see Reuters, "Voting starts in France, Sarkozy headed for defeat."

Russia Considers Preemptive Strike Against U.S.-Led Missile System in Europe

Our national security's in the very best of hands.

In March, President Obama told Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that "after my election I have more flexibility."

Well here comes the news that Moscow couldn't care less.

At the Los Angeles Times, "Russia says preemptive strike on NATO missile system is possible":

MOSCOW — Russia may consider a preemptive strike on a missile defense system in Europe if the U.S.-led NATO project continues as planned, a top official said Thursday.

Russian Chief of General Staff Nikolai Makarov, in a sign of the tension between Russia and the United States over the missile defense plans, said during an international conference that a strike by his country might be possible.

"A decision to use destructive force preemptively will be taken if the situation worsens," Makarov said.

Makarov's remark followed a statement by Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov, who said Russian and U.S. consultations on the subject were "close to a dead end."

"This will mean that the U.S.A. and NATO intend to develop the ABM [anti-ballistic missile] system without taking Russia's concerns into consideration," Serdyukov said. "Now our countries are faced with a dilemma: We will either pass a cooperation test and jointly react to new missile challenges and threats or will be obligated to take up military-technical measures given the realization of anti-missile plans."

Well, no doubt they're just rattling sabers for domestic consumption.

Nothing to worry about at all. Move along now. Nothing to see here.

Obama Kicks-Off Re-Election Campaign, Attacks Mitt Romney

It's all about blaming the GOP for the economy and personally attacking the presumptive Republican nominee. It's going to be a long summer, sheesh.

At ABC News, "President Obama Hits Romney Directly at First Re-election Rally." And The Hill, "The gloves come off as Obama launches reelection campaign."

And at CNN, "Obama outlines case for re-election at first official campaign rally" (via Memeorandum):