Lacey Banghard for Zoo Magazine January 2014

At Egotastic!, "Lacey Banghard Exhibits Her Big and Friendlies for Zoo."

Previous Lacey Banghard blogging is here.

MSNBC President Phil Griffin Apologizes to Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus

This is something else.

At Politico, "MSNBC president apologizes to RNC, fires staffer responsible for tweet."

And at Twitchy, "MSNBC head apologizes for ‘outrageous’ bigoted tweet, but will anything change? [video]."

More at Mediagazer.



More at Mediaite, "Rothman: The RNC’s Boycott of MSNBC is Brilliant."

Dems Give Up on Retaking House of Representatives

Instead, they'll focus on damage control in the Senate.

Via Politico, "Democrats: Cede the House to save the Senate" (via Memeorandum):

With Democrats’ grasp on the Senate increasingly tenuous — and the House all but beyond reach — some top party donors and strategists are moving to do something in the midterm election as painful as it is coldblooded: Admit the House can’t be won and go all in to save the Senate.

Their calculation is uncomplicated. With only so much money to go around in an election year that is tilting the GOP’s way, Democrats need to concentrate resources on preserving the chamber they have now. Losing the Senate, they know, could doom whatever hopes Barack Obama has of salvaging the final years of his presidency.

The triage idea is taking hold in phone conversations among donors and in strategy sessions between party operatives. Even some of the people who have invested the most to get House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi back into the speaker’s chair are moving in that direction.

“There is no question that Democratic donors are shifting towards the Senate in 2014. They will continue to support Nancy, but everyone agrees that the emphasis is going to be on the Senate,” said Joe Cotchett, a prominent San Francisco trial attorney and friend of Pelosi’s who has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Democratic Party candidates and causes. “When you see people like [longtime California Democratic Rep.] George Miller announcing that they are not running again, you know where the money will be going.”

“…[U]nless we have a George Washington Bridge fiasco in the House,” he added, referring to the traffic scandal that has engulfed Republican New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, “control is not going to change.”

Terrible analogy. Scandals generally don't engulf an entire party, especially in a year like this.

That said, I seriously can't wait until November, when I get to hammer the election results over Martin Longman's head.

More at at NYT, "Unpopularity of the House Could Turn Senate Races" (via Memeorandum).

Entrenched Democrat Henry Waxman to Retire From Congress

I wonder if this opens the way for Marianne Williamson to waltz to the Democrat nomination. LAT had this sometime back, "Marianne Williamson's spiritual path into political realm."

And here's the news on Waxman:

One of the Democratic Party's most prolific and savvy legislators, Henry Waxman, will retire from Congress http://t.co/qGEMasehod
— Politics Now (@latimespolitics) January 30, 2014

Democratic district. In addition to being a relatively safe seat, its many wealthy, politically active residents make the district, which runs from Beverly Hills and Malibu down the coast to the Palos Verdes Peninsula, one of country’s leading sources of campaign contributions. The ability to steer those donations to fellow lawmakers offers a path to power in the House that Waxman employed actively early in his career and that others will certainly covet.

Two political independents already had announced plans to challenge Waxman this year, but Democratic office holders who would not have run against the incumbent are now likely to enter the race.

In an interview, Waxman, 74, said that he had decided, simply, that the time had come to do something else.

“At the end of this year, I would have been in Congress for 40 years,” he said. “If there is a time for me to move on to another chapter in my life, I think this is the time to do it.

Obama's Operating Method Has Been Social and Political Division

From Daniel Henninger, at WSJ, "Obama's State of Disunion" (via Google):

The 2008 campaign phrase "hope and change" will haunt future histories of the Obama presidency.

Many Americans voted Barack Obama into the White House for that reason alone. That reason is gone. The notion that this president would unify the nation by allowing people to summon their better spirits, as he promised, faded fast.

Even Mr. Obama's supporters see now that his operating method wasn't unification, but political and social division. Support for the president among the independents who gave him 52% of their vote in 2008 has fallen into the 30s.

Dividing the nation in his first term so that some Americans would vote in anger against his opposition was clearly the game plan from the start. He repeatedly scapegoated "the wealthiest" and the "1 percent." In 2012 when House Republicans published their deficit-reduction proposals, Mr. Obama dismissed the document as "laughable," "social Darwinism" and "antithetical to our entire history."

After four years of the politics of divide-and-conquer, Mr. Obama had stirred sufficient resentment in his political base to win a second term. What he has produced entering the sixth year of his presidency is a nation in a state of disunion.

The pollsters at Gallup wrote last week that Mr. "Obama is on course to have the most politically polarized approval ratings of any president." Segments of the U.S. population see themselves not just in disagreement with the Obama administration, but as the target of its policies.

This includes not only the famous 1%, but also the upper-middle class, Southern states, charter schools, politically active conservatives, private businesses, the Catholic church, electric utilities, doctors driven out of ObamaCare's health networks and those famous partisans, the Little Sisters of the Poor.

All have been vilified, investigated, audited or sued by the president himself, Eric Holder's Justice Department, the National Labor Relations Board, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency and, not least, the Internal Revenue Service. Last year's most remarkable polling number from Gallup said in December that 72% of Americans regard big government as the greatest threat to the U.S. They got the message.

Even ObamaCare has contributed. The law's rules pit the healthy against the unhealthy by forcing them to pay higher premiums to subsidize the unhealthy. Catholics, some of whom might have supported ObamaCare, see their hospitals as singled out for retribution by their government.

The administration's supporters dismiss complaints about the in-your-face tenor of the Obama presidency as conservative sour grapes. "We won," they say, "get over it." OK, you won, but what have you done with it? Where's the upside?

The slow fade of hope is revealed in last week's Fox News poll, with 74% saying the country feels as if it's still in a recession, no matter that the real one ended in early 2009. It's hard to pretend hope is coming when, five years after the 2008 election, December's monthly jobs report said 347,000 Americans have given up looking for work. That's your real income inequality—the legions of chronically unemployed Americans who now have no earned income whatsoever.

In his speech, Mr. Obama pitched the causes of weak employment back "more than three decades." This 30-year-old problem has three major policy solutions available to him in 2014: tax reform, pending free-trade legislation and immigration reform. All require doing business with the other party in Congress. He can't, and by personal disposition doesn't want to. The speech made that clear.

Instead, Mr. Obama said his overdue promise of change is going to roll in on a cascade of unilateral executive orders and directives from his regulatory bureaucracies.

More at the link.

IMAGE CREDIT: People's Cube.

Anna Kendrick Game Day Newcastle Commercial: 'Approachable Hot'

She's hot.

At London's Daily Mail, "'I'm hot, but like, approachable hot': Anna Kendrick questions her attractiveness in hilarious 'non-Super Bowl' commercial":

'I'll just give you an endorsement now. "Hi, Newcastle Brown Ale, the only beer that ever promised me a paying role in a Super Bowl commercial and then backed out at the last f****ing second like a bunch of d**ks. Suck it,' she says as she motions to get up, before saying again, 'Suck it.'

Skydiver James Lee Knocked Unconscious is Rescued by Quick-Thinking Friends (VIDEO)

It's a miracle.

At ABC News, "VIDEO: Helmetcam Shows Unconscious Skydiver's Descent." And at London's Daily Mail, "Terror at 12,500ft: Watch the horrifying moment a skydiver plummets to the ground unconscious after being knocked out by another jumper in freak accident."

WaPo/ABC News Poll: Hillary Clinton Has Big Democratic Lead for 2016 Nomination

At the Washington Post, "For 2016, Hillary Clinton has commanding lead over Democrats, GOP race wide open":

Hillary Rodham Clinton holds a commanding 6 to 1 lead over other Democrats heading into the 2016 presidential campaign, while the Republican field is deeply divided with no clear front-runner, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Clinton trounces her potential primary rivals with 73 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, reinforcing a narrative of inevitability around her nomination if she runs. Vice President Biden is second with 12 percent, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) is third with 8 percent.

Although Clinton’s favorability rating has fallen since she stepped down as secretary of state a year ago, she has broad Democratic support across ideological, gender, ethnic and class lines. Her lead is the largest recorded in an early primary matchup in at least 30 years of Post-ABC polling.

The race for the Republican nomination, in contrast, is wide open, with six prospective candidates registering 10 percent to 20 percent support. No candidate has broad backing from both tea party activists and mainline Republicans, signaling potential fissures when the GOP picks a standard-bearer in 2016.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who was at or near the top of the Republican field in many public opinion surveys last year, appears to have suffered politically from the bridge-traffic scandal engulfing his administration.

The new survey puts Christie in third place — with the support of 13 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents — behind Rep. Paul Ryan (Wis.) with 20 percent and former Florida governor Jeb Bush at 18 percent. The rest of the scattered pack includes Sens. Ted Cruz (Tex.), Rand Paul (Ky.) and Marco Rubio (Fla.), who are at 12, 11 and 10 percent, respectively.

Among strong backers of the tea party — who make up about one-fifth of the Republicans polled — Cruz has a big lead, with 28 percent, followed by Ryan, at 18 percent. But Cruz, an iconoclastic freshman senator who rose to prominence during last fall’s partial government shutdown, registers just 4 percent among those who oppose or have no opinion of the tea party.

Christie is weakest among the strong tea party set, winning 6 percent of that group, but he has the backing of 15 percent of other Republicans. Bush’s base of support comes from self-identified Republicans, while Ryan’s strength comes from white evangelical Protestants, young voters and less conservative wings of the party. Rubio does particularly well among Republicans with college degrees.

Christie has benefited from the perception that he has unique appeal among independents and some Democrats, a reputation the governor burnished with his 2013 reelection in his strongly Democratic state.

But that image has been tarnished, the survey finds. More Democrats now view Christie unfavorably than favorably, with independents divided. Republicans, meanwhile, have a lukewarm opinion, with 43 percent viewing him favorably and 33 percent unfavorably. Overall, 35 percent of Americans see him favorably and 40 percent unfavorably.

The 2016 presidential campaign is not likely to start taking shape until the end of this year, when candidates are expected to begin declaring their intentions. Among the Republicans, Ryan and Bush appear to be the most ambivalent about a campaign. Other Republicans not named in the poll, such as Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, could gain steam as potential candidates.

On the Democratic side, Warren has said she will not run, although she has a loyal following among some liberal groups hoping to draft an alternative to Clinton.

Polling this far out in the cycle is poor at forecasting winners of party nomination battles, but it offers important clues about current voter attitudes. Major fundraisers and party activists in particular look to such polls as indications of potential candidates’ strengths and weaknesses on the national stage as they begin to pick their horses.

In a theoretical head-to-head general-election matchup, Clinton leads Christie among registered voters, 53 percent to 41 percent. This is a far larger deficit than Republicans had in the popular vote in the past two presidential elections. In 2012, President Obama beat Mitt Romney by 51 percent to 47 percent, and he beat John McCain by 53 percent to 46 percent in 2008.

Christie is hurt by weak support among independents — trailing Clinton by 48 percent to 43 percent — as well as by a less consolidated party base. Although 90 percent of Democrats say they would back Clinton, only 79 percent of Republicans say they would support Christie. By contrast, Romney beat Obama among independents by five percentage points, and he won 93 percent of Republican votes.

Clinton, who would become the first female president if elected, shows enormous strength among women in the new poll. She leads Christie among female voters by 59 percent to 34 percent — more than double the 11-point margin Obama held over Romney.

Not a lot of suspense there. Clinton will not only run, she'll run away with the nomination. And the GOP? It remains to be seen.

IMAGE CREDIT: iOWNTHEWORLD.

Scarlett Johansson Cuts Ties With Oxfam Over Group's Support for BDS Movement

I blogged on this the other day, "Scarlett Johansson and the (BDS) Politics of Celebrity Ambassadors."

And now at Algemeiner (via Bad Blue):

Actress Scarlett Johansson ended her relationship with Oxfam International citing “a fundamental difference of opinion” over the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, the Associated Press reported Wednesday evening, citing her spokesman.

“Scarlett Johansson has respectfully decided to end her ambassador role with Oxfam after eight years,” her statement said. “She and Oxfam have a fundamental difference of opinion in regards to the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement. She is very proud of her accomplishments and fundraising efforts during her tenure with Oxfam.”

Johansson’s rift with the relief group began earlier this month when she was unveiled as the new face of Israeli carbonated drinks maker, SodaStream. Following the announcement, anti-Israel groups attacked Johansson citing the company’s West Bank based factory, which they deem to be problematic.

“Oxfam is opposed to all trade from Israeli settlements, which are illegal under international law,” the group said at the time, adding that, “We have made our concerns known to Ms. Johansson and we are now engaged in a dialogue on these important issues.”

Johansson responded with a detailed statement highlighting the cooperation that takes place between Jews and Arabs at SodaStream’s factory. “SodaStream is a company that is not only committed to the environment but to building a bridge to peace between Israel and Palestine, supporting neighbors working alongside each other, receiving equal pay, equal benefits and equal rights,” she said at the time.

“I remain a supporter of economic cooperation and social interaction between a democratic Israel and Palestine,” she added...

More at the top link.

ADDED: An excellent post from William Jacobson, at Legal Insurrection, "BDS takes Oxfam down with it as Scarlett Johansson resigns."

Linked at Lowering the Boom, "Under Political Pressure, Scarlett Johansson Steps Down From Oxfam Ambassador Role." Thanks!

.@MSNBC's Alex Wagner Attacks (Condescends to) Cathy McMorris Rodgers' During #SOTU Response

I read this extremely fascinating (if not entirely eye-opening) piece on MSNBC's Alex Wager the other day, at Instapundit, "MATTHEW CONTINETTI: Love in the Time of Obama: Alex Wagner, Sam Kass, and the new aristocracy."

Wagner apparently was once a personal assistant to George Clooney and she later married President Obama's personal White Houses chef Sam Kass. She's part of the new snobbish elite who've ascended on the tails of their connections, not on grit and merit. We've heard these kinds of stories before, but of late, with all the talk of "income inequality," it bears noting that status inequality is the new marker for leftists disdainful of flyover Americans.

Ace of SpadesHQ had a long post on this yesterday, "The Left Talks a Great Deal About the Evils of Income Inequality, But Is Very Happy to Perpetuate a Regime of Social Inequality":

Social inequality -- that is, strong caste and class identification, and disparagement of all other (or "lesser," in the eyes of the class-obsessed person) castes and classes -- has gotten more pronounced over the past ten years.

It is weaponized for politics. Sarah Palin quite plainly is not dismissed by the New Class merely because they disagree with her beliefs. Their disdain has a nasty personal edge to it -- they disapprove of her and the class she hails from. The New Class is not to content itself with disparaging Palin. They actively wish to include millions of Americans they've never even met inside the broad circle of their angry, arrogant disdain. The fact that they are not just attacking Palin but attacking millions of other people is not a bug, but a feature. The additional casualties of the attack are not regrettable collateral damage, but rather bonus damage to be celebrated.

Yes "weaponized," as in Wagner's tweet Tuesday ridiculing the House Republican Conference chairwoman:

Living room. Lady on a settee. Where's the needlepoint?

— Alex Wagner (@alexwagner) January 29, 2014

Wagner is criticized as the perfect parrot for the left's tut-tut Democrat Party line. And her attack on McMorris Rodgers jibes perfectly with the longstanding leftist war on women that's really driving American gender politics. Rep. McMorris Rodgers is a particularly dangerous threat to radical feminism, according to Hanna Rosin at Slate, because she's a more "subtle model" for "values feminism" than Sarah Palin.

More at Fox Nation, "‘Where’s the Needlepoint?’: MSNBC’s Alex Wagner Mocks Female Republican's SOTU Response."

And at Mediaite, "Megyn Kelly and Guests Go After Alex Wagner’s ‘Blatantly Sexist’ Tweet."

.@MSNBC Takes Down Racist Hate-Tweet Attacking Conservatives Over New Biracial Cheerios Commercial

Typical.

This is racist Walter James Casper's channel.

At Twitchy, "‘Self unaware overload’: Despicable MSNBC pounded by reality after saying ‘right wing will hate’ bi-racial family [pics]."

And Politico, "MSNBC trolls the right with Cheerios tweet."



More at Fire Andrea Mitchell, "MSNBC: right wing hates new Cheerios ad with biracial family," and American Glob, "How the Left Lies About Conservatives."

The Right Scoop has the video, "Official @MSNBC on twitter accuses ‘rightwing’ of being racist."

Earlier, this account tweeted an offensive line about the new Cheerios ad. We deeply regret it. It does not reflect the position of msnbc.

— msnbc (@msnbc) January 30, 2014

We are deleting the earlier offensive tweet. It does not reflect msnbc's position and we apologize.

— msnbc (@msnbc) January 30, 2014

I think they're going to need a more formal, forceful statement.

'Women Make 77 Cents to Every Man's Dollar'? Nope, Not True

Following up on my promise to update this morning, "#SOTU: 'Time to Do Away With Workplace Policies That Belong in a 'Mad Men' Episode...'"

Here's Hanna Rosin, at Slate, "The Gender Wage Gap Lie." (Via Memeorandum.)

The point here is not that there is no wage inequality. But by focusing our outrage into a tidy, misleading statistic we’ve missed the actual challenges. It would in fact be much simpler if the problem were rank sexism and all you had to do was enlighten the nation’s bosses or throw the Equal Pay Act at them. But the 91 percent statistic suggests a much more complicated set of problems. Is it that women are choosing lower-paying professions or that our country values women’s professions less? And why do women work fewer hours? Is this all discrimination or, as economist Claudia Goldin likes to say, also a result of “rational choices” women make about how they want to conduct their lives.

I don't particularly care or Rosin, by the way. She's the author of The End of Men: And the Rise of Women, which was also featured as a cover story at the Atlantic, "The End of Men":

Earlier this year, women became the majority of the workforce for the first time in U.S. history. Most managers are now women too. And for every two men who get a college degree this year, three women will do the same. For years, women’s progress has been cast as a struggle for equality. But what if equality isn’t the end point? What if modern, postindustrial society is simply better suited to women? A report on the unprecedented role reversal now under way— and its vast cultural consequences.

I don't have the statistics from my college, but women do very well in my classes. Their success mirrors the general trends folks may have read about regarding "the war on boys." Frankly, there are no neat conclusions on this. What's particularly pathetic, however, is that the president would push a bogus slogan in the State of the Union address to solidify has base. He's such an asshole.

A Constitutional Right to Public Masturbation in the Presence of Children?

It's hard to believe this, but it's happening.

At iOWNTHEWORLD, "Is Whacking Off in Front of Children an Exercise in Free Speech?" Well, it's a "right" if you're a deranged, depraved regressive leftist:

PJ Media’s Megan Fox continues to battle a local library that seems to think that filtering porn on their computers, and in the process blocking the fap material for public masturbators and the mentally deranged that enjoy watching porn around children, is an assault on the 1st amendment.

You know what else is a 1st amendment right? Taking pictures of people who access porn in the library and posting it on a website called PornSurfersAtThePublicLibrary.

Do leftists have a problem with that? Well, to wrap their heads around it they can think of it as akin to publishing the names and addresses of people who legally own guns.

Click through to read the Megan Fox piece. She's got a whole series on this going at Pajamas Media.

@Edroso Commenter Threatens Workplace Harassment Over Pete Seeger Communist Blogging — UPDATED AND BUMPED!!

It's one of the leftists over at Roy Edroso's blog, who writes:

Wonder how your employer's administration would enjoy reading a copy of this comment?

The comment's at the link.

Interesting how Edroso's entire community of depraved harassment leftists are down with it. No push back. F-k 'em. It never ceases to amaze me that virtually the first response of all leftists is to contact your employer. It's too pat. I understand more than ever why people blog anonymously. Personally, I've always put my reputation out there. Regressive leftists can't debate you. They can't win on the merits. All they have are lies and harassment. I've been through this too many times to recount. I'm up to a half dozen or so attempts to have me fired, a couple of which have instigated frivolous investigations.

These people are driven by hatred. All in a day's blogging, I guess.

Here's the search tag for "workplace harassment," which is voluminous.

Previous Communist Pete Seeger blogging is here.

*****

UPDATED!!

My department chair has been contacted by someone named "Selwyn Hollis."

I have sent this Hollis person an email to their gmail account of the same name. I have not heard back.

Also there is a Dr. Selwyn Hollis, Professor of Mathematics, at Armstrong Atlantic State University, Savannah, Georgia. I cannot confirm if my harasser is the same as Professor Hollis.

Again, I do not know if this is the same "Selwyn Hollis"?

However, if readers are concerned, and need information or confirmation on "Selwyn Hollis," they should inquire with the Chairman of the Department of Mathematics, Dr. James Brawner:

Department of Mathematics
College of Science and Technology
University Hall 297
11935 Abercorn Street
Savannah, GA 31419

Thanks dear readers. And remember, never cave to these assholes. All they have are threats and intimidation. They never win debates on the merits. They attack and harass like the evil assholes they are. F-k 'em.

GOP Senate Takeover Within Reach

From Beth Reinhard, at National Journal, "6 Signs a Republican Senate Takeover Is Within Reach":

Republican gains and President Obama's weakness have Democrats on their heels, preparing to fight for Senate seats they never thought they would have to defend and hoping that 2016 will give them a chance to win back the Senate if they lose it next year.

Mark Warner, one of the most popular Democrats in the Senate, is now facing a serious challenge from one of the few Virginia Republicans who can keep pace with his fundraising. Polls show the Republican favorite in Michigan running evenly with Democratic Rep. Gary Peters, and raising more money than him as well. Republicans are even watching the Oregon Senate race closely, where a Republican physician running against Obamacare raised a half-million dollars against Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley.

Democrats are feeling the pressure and looking longingly at 2016, when the political landscape should be nearly as favorable to them as the 2014 environment is perilous to their majority. This year, the party is defending seven states that rejected Obama in 2012; the GOP will be defending six seats in state that he carried that year in 2016.

"We always knew this cycle would have a number of difficult seats to defend," said Democratic strategist Jef Pollock. "Everything stacks up better for us in 2016."

What's changed in the past month is that a handful of states once thought to be safely Democratic—such as Michigan, Oregon, and Virginia—could become highly competitive in a best-case GOP scenario. If President Obama's approval ratings don't improve and Republicans catch a few breaks, the GOP could ride a wave to a majority that could withstand a small 2016 setback.

"They've put candidates on the ballot," acknowledged J.B. Poersch, who advises Senate Majority PAC, a Democratic super PAC focused on the Senate. But he added, "Six months from now, or even four months from now, how many of these are actually going to be races? It's great to be able to laundry list candidates and another to see how viable they're going to be."

Keep reading.

With Social Media's Rise, the Pulpit Isn't Just the President's Anymore

Heh.

At NYT:

On floor of house waitin on "Kommandant-In-Chef"... the Socialistic dictator who's been feeding US a line or is it "A-Lying?"

— Randy Weber (@TXRandy14) January 29, 2014

WASHINGTON — Twitter has fast become the conventional-wisdom clearinghouse and real-time echo chamber for major political events, so it was not surprising Tuesday evening when Twitter also became the forum where opinion on President Obama’s State of the Union address seemed to crystallize before he had even finished speaking.

“The media party line where everyone can listen in,” said Mike Murphy, a Republican strategist.

“The town hall for the media and political elite,” said Erik Smith, a Democratic strategist and founder of Blue Engine Message and Media.

The power of Twitter to shape the debate (for better or worse) was on display shortly before Mr. Obama began, when Representative Randy Weber, Republican of Texas, posted an error-riddled message that called the president a “Socialistic dictator,” and quickly went viral.

Indeed, Twitter’s ability to focus the pundit class helps explain why, in the fierce competition to control the political narrative, lawmakers, candidates, operatives and even the president are increasingly turning to it and other social media. The battle is the same as before, but they are now hoping to prevail 140 characters at a time.

“Conventional wisdom is like fast-drying concrete in the Twitter age — it doesn’t take long to harden,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York. “Twitter is one of the fastest ways to shape opinion.”

The State of the Union address spawned a bipartisan embrace of new photo- and video-sharing platforms, and a rush to create tweetable graphics and synchronized hashtags to amplify messages. Democrats and Republicans competed to make their views the majority, often with little regard to what the president actually said. Members of Congress sent out 750 tweets over the course of Mr. Obama’s speech, according to data provided by Twitter.

Congressional Republicans rallied around hashtags like #CloseTheGap, to push their message of reducing income inequality, and #YearOfAction, to call on Mr. Obama to act on some of their major proposals in the coming year. (Of course, especially after the president called for a “year of action” in his address, #YearofAction took off among Republicans and Democrats alike.)

And, perhaps more notably, Republicans set up “recording stations” on Vine, the Twitter-owned platform for sharing six-second videos, and Instagram to allow caucus members to record short responses that they could share before, during and after the speech.

When Mr. Obama got to the part of his address where he said he was willing to go around Congress through executive orders, Representative Paul Gosar, Republican of Arizona, was ready. As if on cue, he tweeted out a prerecorded Vine video featuring him sitting him behind his desk and stating, “If the president has a pen and a telephone, we have the Constitution.”

Keep reading.

.@MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell: 'Iran Was More or Less an American Ally' Before Bush's 'Axis of Evil'

Oh brother.

At Hot Air, "Andrea Mitchell: Remember how Iran was sort of an ally after 9/11 until Bush’s “axis of evil” speech?"

And at Twitchy, "‘Are you insane?’ Andrea Mitchell suggests Iran was our ally before Bush’s ‘Axis of Evil’ speech."

Barack Obama's Imperial Presidency

Man, I'm glad at least someone's not hiding behind their mama's knickers. Sheesh.

Take it to these f-kers. You go Ted Cruz!

At WSJ, "The Imperial Presidency of Barack Obama":

Of all the troubling aspects of the Obama presidency, none is more dangerous than the president's persistent pattern of lawlessness, his willingness to disregard the written law and instead enforce his own policies via executive fiat. On Monday, Mr. Obama acted unilaterally to raise the minimum wage paid by federal contracts, the first of many executive actions the White House promised would be a theme of his State of the Union address Tuesday night.

The president's taste for unilateral action to circumvent Congress should concern every citizen, regardless of party or ideology. The great 18th-century political philosopher Montesquieu observed: "There can be no liberty where the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or body of magistrates." America's Founding Fathers took this warning to heart, and we should too.

Rule of law doesn't simply mean that society has laws; dictatorships are often characterized by an abundance of laws. Rather, rule of law means that we are a nation ruled by laws, not men. That no one—and especially not the president—is above the law. For that reason, the U.S. Constitution imposes on every president the express duty to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."

Yet rather than honor this duty, President Obama has openly defied it by repeatedly suspending, delaying and waiving portions of the laws he is charged to enforce. When Mr. Obama disagreed with federal immigration laws, he instructed the Justice Department to cease enforcing the laws. He did the same thing with federal welfare law, drug laws and the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

On many of those policy issues, reasonable minds can disagree. Mr. Obama may be right that some of those laws should be changed. But the typical way to voice that policy disagreement, for the preceding 43 presidents, has been to work with Congress to change the law. If the president cannot persuade Congress, then the next step is to take the case to the American people. As President Reagan put it: "If you can't make them see the light, make them feel the heat" of electoral accountability.

President Obama has a different approach. As he said recently, describing his executive powers: "I've got a pen, and I've got a phone." Under the Constitution, that is not the way federal law is supposed to work.

Keep reading. (Via Memeorandum.)

Tea Party Response to the State of the Union — Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah)

A hard-hitting address.

At Politico, "Mike Lee tea party response: Barack Obama at fault for inequality":

Sen. Mike Lee tried to challenge the Democrats on their own turf by discussing an “inequality crisis” in his official tea party rebuttal to the State of the Union on Tuesday, while fellow tea party darling Sen. Rand Paul struck more familiar Republican chords in a separate speech.

Lee’s language echoed Democrats who have been actively raising concerns about growing inequality in American society. But the Utah Republican cast the solution in distinctly conservative terms.

“This inequality crisis presents itself in three principal forms,” Lee (R-Utah) said. “Immobility among the poor, who are being trapped in poverty by big-government programs; insecurity in the middle class, where families are struggling just to get ahead, and they can’t seem to get ahead; and cronyist privilege at the top, where political and economic insiders twist the immense power of the federal government to profit at the expense of everyone else.”

Lee highlighted educational and economic inequality, but argued that government is a root cause of growing disparities. He also included issues like abortion, same-sex marriage and National Security Agency surveillance as examples of big-government policies that lead to “real inequality.”

But the worst culprit, Lee argued, is the Democratic health care law.

“Obamacare – all by itself – is an inequality Godzilla that has robbed working families of their insurance, their doctors, their wages and their jobs,” Lee said. “Many Americans are now seeing why some of us fought so hard to stop this train-wreck over the last four years.”

President Barack Obama, Lee added, “has paid lip-service” to addressing inequality “but seems uninterested in truly confronting or correcting” it.

We'll see.

He's got a pretty good laundry list of reforms. It's going to take majority power to actually push these things through the Congress, which is why the stakes are as high as ever in November.

More at Hot Air, "The State of the Union: Six down… and two to go" (via Memeorandum).

Cintia Dicker for Sports Illustrated Swimsuit 2013

Taking it day by day, now. Heh.

Until next month, at SI, "Cintia Dicker Swimsuit Photos."

#SOTU: 'Time to Do Away With Workplace Policies That Belong in a 'Mad Men' Episode...'

I thought half the Democratic conference was going to have a collective orgasm. Looks at these lollygagging dolls.

At the Wrap, "Obama Says Enough With Anti-Women Policies That ‘Belong in a ‘Mad Men’ Episode’ in State of the Union Address."

Leftists will be all over this today, although O's comments are easily fact-checked and found wanting. Women, at comparable levels of education, make as much as men do. I'll update when there's more on this.

'And don't forget Republicans led by Teabagger Ted Cruz shut down the Government!'

Heh.

You gotta love Twitchy, "‘Racist honkie trailor park living people’; 30 tweets bashing the Tea Party during the SOTU speech."

And don't forget Republicans led by Teabagger Ted Cruz shut down the Government! It either their way or no way! Screw Americans #SOTU

— Nicole (@MzDivah67) January 29, 2014

Leftists are dirtbag scum. And communist filth. Fight them to the finish. Stand up to their hatred. Hit back twice as hard.

President Clinton Passed Speaker Gingrich a 'Secret Note' Before 1996 #SOTU

Longtime readers will recall that I'm no fan of Newt Gingrich.

That said, this is interesting. Here's the former Speaker with an intimate look back at what appears to be a proud moment in the political limelight.

Congressman Michael Grimm Threatens NY1 Reporter

Not becoming of a congressman, at NY1 News, "Rep. Grimm Threatens NY1 Reporter Following State of the Union."

The reporter finished his on-air report, saying Rep. Grimm didn't want to talk about campaign finance allegations:

"So Congressman Michael Grimm does not want to talk about some of the allegations concerning his campaign finances," Scotto said before tossing back to the station. But as the camera continued to roll, Grimm walked back up to Scotto and began speaking to him in a low voice.

"What?" Scotto responded. "I just wanted to ask you..."

Grimm: "Let me be clear to you, you ever do that to me again I'll throw you off this f-----g balcony."

Scotto: "Why? I just wanted to ask you..."

[[cross talk]]

Grimm: "If you ever do that to me again..."

Scotto: "Why? Why? It’s a valid question."

[[cross talk]]

Grimm: "No, no, you're not man enough, you're not man enough. I'll break you in half. Like a boy."

More at the link, plus video.

Also at CNN, "New York congressman threatens to throw reporter off balcony." (At Memeorandum.)

Grimm's a Republican, the idiot. Here's his statement:

“I was extremely annoyed because I was doing NY1 a favor by rushing to do their interview first in lieu of several other requests. The reporter knew that I was in a hurry and was only there to comment on the State of the Union, but insisted on taking a disrespectful and cheap shot at the end of the interview, because I did not have time to speak off-topic. I verbally took the reporter to task and told him off, because I expect a certain level of professionalism and respect, especially when I go out of my way to do that reporter a favor. I doubt that I am the first Member of Congress to tell off a reporter, and I am sure I won’t be the last...”

'Too many people are falling further and further behind because, right now, the president's policies are making people's lives harder...'

That's the line that stuck with me most. It's something I've talked about in my classes, especially on healthcare and jobs for college aged students.

At Politico, "McMorris Rodgers promotes ‘hopeful’ agenda."

The text is here, "State of the Union GOP response: Cathy McMorris Rodgers (text, video)."

Obama Pledges 'Year of Action' on Economy and Jobs

At ABC News, "In State of the Union 2014, President Obama Pushes for Year of Action on Economic Opportunity" (via Memeorandum).

And at the New New York Times, "Obama Vows Solo Action on Economic Gap":

WASHINGTON — After five years of fractious political combat, President Obama declared independence from Congress on Tuesday as he vowed to tackle economic disparity with a series of limited initiatives on jobs, wages and retirement that he will enact without legislative approval.

Promising “a year of action” as he tries to rejuvenate a presidency mired in low approval ratings and stymied by partisan stalemates, Mr. Obama used his annual State of the Union address to chart a new path forward relying on his own executive authority. But the defiant “with or without Congress” approach was more assertive than any of the individual policies he advanced.

“I’m eager to work with all of you,” a confident Mr. Obama told lawmakers of both parties in the 65-minute nationally televised speech in the House chamber. “But America does not stand still — and neither will I. So wherever and whenever I can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more American families, that’s what I’m going to do.”

The president’s appearance at the Capitol, with all the traditional pomp and anticipation punctuated by partisan standing ovations, came at a critical juncture as Mr. Obama seeks to define his remaining time in office. He touched on foreign policy, asserting that “American diplomacy backed by the threat of force” had forced Syria to give up chemical weapons and that “American diplomacy backed by pressure” had brought Iran to the negotiating table. And he repeated his plan to pull troops out of Afghanistan this year and threatened again to veto sanctions on Iran that disrupt his diplomatic efforts.

The most emotional point of the evening came with the introduction of Sgt. First Class Cory Remsburg, an Army Ranger the president had met both before and after he was ravaged by a roadside bomb in Afghanistan. As Sergeant Remsburg, blind in one eye and having to learn to walk again, made it to his feet in the first lady’s box, lawmakers of both parties gave him an extended ovation.

But Mr. Obama’s message centered on the wide gap between the wealthiest and other Americans as he positioned himself as a champion of those left behind in the modern economy. “Those at the top have never done better,” he said. “But average wages have barely budged. Inequality has deepened. Upward mobility has stalled.

“The cold, hard fact is that even in the midst of recovery, too many Americans are working more than ever just to get by, let alone to get ahead,” he added. “And too many still aren’t working at all. So our job is to reverse these trends.”

To do so, the president announced an executive order raising the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour for future federal contract workers and the creation of a new Treasury savings bond for workers without access to traditional retirement options. He proposed incentives for trucks running on alternative fuels and higher efficiency standards for those running on gasoline. And he announced a meeting on working families and a review of federal job training programs.

Mr. Obama was gambling that a series of ideas that seem small-bore on their own will add up to a larger collective vision of an America with expanded opportunity. But the moderate ambitions were a stark contrast to past years when Mr. Obama proposed sweeping legislation to remake the nation’s health care system, regulate Wall Street, curb climate change and restrict access to high-powered firearms.

Republicans responded by blaming Mr. Obama for the country’s economic problems, but the party’s leaders avoided the language of last year’s government shutdown and hoped to present what Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington called “a more hopeful, Republican vision” intended to appeal particularly to women in a midterm election year...

More at the link.

'America's Most Successful Communist' Trending at Memeorandum

Pretty funny when an almost 10-year-old article on a depraved folk-rock Communist gets linked up by enough bloggers to get a thread on Memeorandum. Heh.

.@RSMcCain Heh. This 2005 piece on Pete Seeger is trending at Memeorandum: "America’s Most Successful Communist." http://t.co/6r0Qn2kg6x

— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) January 28, 2014

PREVIOUSLY: "Communist Folk Singer Pete Seeger Dies at 94," and "On Cue, Far-Left Partisans for Pete Seeger Bring the Hate."

Lolo Jones Makes the U.S. Olympic Bobsled Team

At USA Today, "Lolo Jones handles the heat over bobsled selection."

I haven't been very impressed with Ms. Jones, but I guess she's got some supporters out there. Still, making the bobsled team on your fame is kinda unfair to those who worked years at the sport.

Here's the video from 2008 in Beijing, where Jones clipped the second to the last hurdle and lost an Olympics gold medal: "Athletics - Women's 100M Hurdles - Beijing 2008 Summer Olympic Games." She's never gotten over that.

More at CBS News, "Lolo Jones' selection to Olympic bobsled team criticized."

Sabine Jemeljanova for Nuts January 2014

At Egotastic!, "Sabine Jemeljanova Topless Secretary Nuts Shoot in January 2014."

University of North Carolina Apologizes for Fake Classes, Promises Real Change

At Business Week (via Instapundit).



PREVIOUSLY: "Universities Admitting Illiterate Athletes," and "UNC Professor Mary Willingham Receives Death Threats After Bombshell Research on College Athlete Illiteracy."

Also, "University of North Carolina Suspends Athlete Illiteracy Research by Mary Willingham," and "Illiterate Athletes a Symptom of Nationwide Problem."

On Cue, Far-Left Partisans for Pete Seeger Bring the Hate

It's still early, but I expect it's going to be an interesting day of leftist hatred.

At Alicublog, Roy Edroso calls me an "asshole":

http://t.co/997UgzFeS7 RT @elongreen Look forward to reading @edroso on Seeger.
— edroso (@edroso) January 28, 2014

Then this idiot tells me to "fuck off" on Twitter:

@AmPowerBlog @MsEBL I say this without malice, but "Fuck you!" #PeteSeeger did more for social justice in one day than Repubs did in 50 yrs

— Peggy Brava (@PeggyBrava) January 28, 2014

Here's disgusting hate-troll Repsac3 spewing the pro-Communist propaganda:

Pete Seeger: This Man Surrounded Hate and Forced it to Surrender | The Nation http://t.co/oaBHiPjAle

— J. Casper (@repsac3) January 28, 2014

And Bird Dog takes the heat in the comments at Maggie's Farm:

I saw him perform several times. Grew up middle class, went to prep school and Harvard, affected a working class style but I doubt any working class people were ever interested in him. A likeable old commie, naive and innocent to the end.

*****

No, he was a totalitarian monster and a fraud, and his so-called folk music was also a fraud. He should have died 90 years ago, instead he polluted America for decades. As did all the other so-called folk artists, all of whom were Communist frauds.

*****

Good grief! The guy was an old Commie geezer who never found an enemy of this country he couldn't find a way to support.

He championed the Soviets (you might remember them) during the"nuclear freeze" in the 80's and was an outspoken liar and propagandist about the motives of Ronald Reagan, one of the finest American's who ever swore the office of President.

Obummer probably had to bite his lip and choke back a tear.

My earlier entry is here, "Communist Folk Singer Pete Seeger Dies at 94" (with, so far, one hate-addled apologist for Communism in the comments).

BONUS: Da Tech Guy links, "If only Leni Riefenstahl was a Communist like Pete Seeger…" Thanks!

Communist Folk Singer Pete Seeger Dies at 94

A long obituary at the New York Times, "Pete Seeger, Songwriter and Champion of Folk Music, Dies at 94." This passage is telling:

In 1955 he was subpoenaed by the House Un-American Activities Committee, where he testified, “I feel that in my whole life I have never done anything of any conspiratorial nature.” He also stated: “I am not going to answer any questions as to my association, my philosophical or religious beliefs or my political beliefs, or how I voted in any election, or any of these private affairs. I think these are very improper questions for any American to be asked, especially under such compulsion as this.”

Mr. Seeger offered to sing the songs mentioned by the congressmen who questioned him. The committee declined.

Althouse likes that as well, "'I am not going to answer any questions as to my association, my philosophical or religious beliefs or my political beliefs, or how I voted in any election, or any of these private affairs'." (Via Memeorandum.)

Here's Seeger's entry at Discover the Networks:

In 1945 Seeger became the national director of People's Songs, Inc, an organization designed to “create, promote and distribute songs of labor and the American People.” Within a few years, the California Senate Fact-finding Committee reported that:

"People's Songs is a vital Communist front … one which has spawned a horde of lesser fronts in the fields of music, stage entertainment, choral singing, folk dancing, recording, radio transcriptions and similar fields. It especially is important to Communist proselytizing and propaganda work because of its emphasis on appeal to youth, and because of its organization and technique to provide entertainment for organizations and groups as a smooth opening wedge for Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist propaganda."

Seeger parted ways with the Communist Party in 1950 and eventually renounced strict Stalinism, in favor of socialism and pro-labor activism. "I realized," says Seeger, "I could sing the same songs I sang whether I belonged to the Communist Party or not, and I never liked the idea anyway of belonging to a secret organization."

In 1955 Seeger was subpoenaed by the House Un-American Activities Committee, whose questions about his past Communist ties he answered evasively or not at all. The following year Seeger was indicted for contempt of Congress. In 1961 he was found guilty of that charge and was sentenced to ten years in prison, though in 1962 his conviction was overturned on a technicality.

In the 1960s Seeger was deeply involved in the civil rights movement and its hallmark demonstrations. His musical interpretation of an old spiritual, which he called We Shall Overcome, became a signature song of the movement. The song was played at the founding meeting of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) in 1960. In subsequent years, Seeger would perform benefit concerts on SNCC's behalf.

Historian Ronald Radosh writes: "Throughout the 1950’s and 1960’s, Seeger called for peace, peaceful co-existence between the United States and the Soviet Union, singing songs like Put My Name Down, Brother, Where Do I Sign? -- a ballad in favor of the Soviet Union’s phony international peace petition that favored unilateral disarmament by the West while leaving the Soviet atomic stockpile intact. He would sing and give his support to peace rallies and marches covertly sponsored by the Soviet Union and its Western front groups and dupes -- while leaving his political criticism only for the United States and its defensive actions during the Cold War."

Seeger was an opponent of America's involvement in the Vietnam War. He similarly opposed the U.S. military campaigns and weapons buildup during the Reagan years of the Cold War. He supported the Nuclear Freeze Movement of the 1980s -- a Soviet-sponsored initiative that would have frozen Soviet nuclear and military superiority in place and would have rendered Reagan unable to close that gap to any appreciable degree. Seeger has used his status as a folk icon to lend support to a number of leftwing causes and initiatives.

I don't see it yet, but I expect far-left historian Erik Loomis to post a glowing obituary at some point, at Lawyers, Gays and Marxists. (See Robert Stacy McCain for Loomis' background, "He’s a Lumberjack, and He’s OK: The Wobbly Scholarship of Erik Loomis, Ph.D.")

Expect updates. It's going to be interesting to see the leftist bloggers salivate over Seeger's anti-American legacy.

What Purpose International Holocaust Remembrance Day?

From Caroline Glick, at JPost, "International Holocaust Remembrance Day’s fatal flaw":

On the surface, it is very moving to see half of the members of Knesset at Auschwitz marking International Holocaust Remembrance Day.

But in a larger sense, it is not at all clear why this is necessary.

The Jewish people have Yom HaShoah V’Hagevura, our own national day of mourning for the genocide of our people in Europe.

More importantly, we carry the legacy of the Holocaust inside of us.

Every day, at some level, we experience the ulcerative loss of a third of the Jewish people in the hell of Europe, because we feel the hollow absence of the victims.

The six million murdered have become 10 million descendants who were never born. And we miss them.

We remember them too, every day, when we look at our children and thank God we can protect them.

Israel does not need this extra Holocaust memorial day. And before we send another delegation of elected officials to Auschwitz next January 27, we need to ask whether this extra day serves any positive purpose.

In November 2005, Israel was one of the co-sponsors of the UN General Assembly resolution that made January 27, the day Auschwitz was liberated, International Holocaust Remembrance Day. At the time, Israeli politicians and American Jewish leaders extolled the resolution as signaling a new era of UN relations with the Jewish state.

Consider for instance that a week before its duly mandated International Holocaust Remembrance Day, the UN ushered in 2014 as the Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. The occasion was marked among other things, by the January 20 opening of a yearlong exhibit at the UN Headquarters in New York portraying Israelis as Nazis and Palestinians as Jews.

Since 2005, anti-Semitism has risen throughout Europe, as have levels of anti-Semitism among Europhilic Americans.

Jews throughout Europe feel under assault, and unprotected. The situation is so bad that Jews don’t even bother reporting most of the anti-Semitic attacks they suffer.

The more closely we consider events the more clearly we see that ironically and obscenely, Holocaust memorializing in Europe is enabling anti-Semitism.

Europeans use the focus on the Holocaust to pretend that European anti-Semitism began with the Nazis’ rise to power in 1933 and ended with their defeat 12 years later. In truth, the Nazis’ rise to power was a natural consequence of 1,600 years of European Jew hatred.

From the time of Roman Emperor Constantine, persecution, expulsion and massacre of Jews was the norm, not the exception, in European life.

Hitler and his colleagues were adored not despite their hatred of Jews and their organization of German politics around the dehumanization of Jewish people. They were supported by the Germans, and by the majority of the people in the European lands they conquered because of their anti-Semitism and their dehumanization of Jews.

This Jew hatred did not die in Auschwitz.

As Ruth Wisse explained in August 2010, political anti-Semitism was resuscitated immediately after the war ended with the establishment of the Arab League. The League’s sole purpose was to reorganize anti-Semitic politics around denying the Jewish people their legal right to establish a sovereign state in their homeland.

In other words, with the establishment of the League in March 1945, the just-ended physical annihilation of European Jewry was replaced by the campaign to deny Jews political freedom and independence in our land.

Rather than combat this affront to international law and to the Charter of the United Nations, Europe, along with the rest of the world, sought to appease, and so facilitated and encouraged Arab anti-Jewish aggression.

Continue reading.

PREVIOUSLY: "Historians Uncover Scale of 'Holocaust by Bullets'."

Nina Agdal for Sports Illustrated Swimsuit 2013

It won't be long now until the new issue's unveiled.

Until then, "Nina Agdal Swimsuit Photos - Sports Illustrated Swimsuit."

Historians Uncover Scale of 'Holocaust by Bullets'

Well, the camps were hardly the only means of extermination for the Nazis, but this is interesting.

At NYT, "Shedding Light on a Vast Toll of Jews Killed Away From the Death Camps":

OSWIECIM, Poland — As one gazes out from the main watchtower at the grim desert that is the crumbling chimneys and crematories, vanished prisoners’ huts, barbed wire and ditches of Birkenau, it is hard to fathom that there were corners of the Nazi realm where, collectively, more killing occurred than in the death camps.

Monday, the 69th anniversary of the day Soviet forces liberated Auschwitz, was observed as International Holocaust Remembrance Day. Yet a third or more of the almost six million Jews killed in the Holocaust perished not in the industrial-scale murder of the camps, but in executions at what historians call killing sites: thousands of villages, quarries, forests, wells, streets and homes that dot the map of Eastern Europe.

The vast numbers killed in what some have termed a “Holocaust by bullets” have slowly garnered greater attention in recent years as historians sift through often sketchy and incomplete records that became available after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

“People sat down and added the numbers up,” said David Silberklang, a senior historian at the International Institute for Holocaust Research at Yad Vashem, Israel’s official Holocaust memorial.

As the number of Holocaust survivors gradually declines, these documents or witness accounts — from Belarus, Ukraine, parts of Russia and the Baltic States — have illuminated a new picture of the Nazis’ methods.

Most of this slaughter occurred in Eastern Europe after the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941, and it mixed with the increasing chaos of the war once the Germans failed to realize their ambition of subduing the Soviets in just eight to 12 weeks and faced the prospect of defeat.

“The further east the Wehrmacht went, the greater the killing,” Dieter Pohl, a professor of history at Klagenfurt University in Austria, said at a conference on the subject this month in Krakow, Poland. The executions and unmarked mass graves became “an element of German rule in Eastern Europe.”

In the years after 1945, the executions were not discussed much. The shock of the discovery of concentration camps was one factor. The camps had survivors, found in place, who told their unimaginable tale. By contrast, the local executions terrorized and silenced survivors in the eastern regions. In addition, after World War II, many witnesses were left behind the Iron Curtain, and no one was interested in their memories.

On the ground, “news about killing in local fields spread much more quickly than the murky rumors” about gassing at concentration camps, Dr. Pohl said.

“Only a few survivors could testify after 1945,” he added. As a result, “there is still no comprehensive overview of the killing sites.”

Dr. Silberklang said that “in the popular mind, this subject is far less known than the Holocaust.” The executions became, he said, “in a sense, invisible.”

Keep reading.

ICYMI: "Have You Read it? The Years of Extermination: Nazi Germany and the Jews, 1939-1945." (And check the Amazon link.)

More Americans Sick of Militant Homosexual Agenda

At Toronto's National Post, "‘Marriage is not a circus event, it’s sacred’: Not everyone was crazy about Macklemore & Ryan Lewis’ mass wedding at the Grammys":

The song Same Love, performed by Macklemore, Mary Lambert and Ryan Lewis at the Grammy Awards on Sunday night, took on a whole new meaning when Queen Latifah emerged during the song to marry 33 couples on sight, many of whom were same-sex.

The couples — ranging also in age and race — were married one after another throughout the song, with many singing along through tears during the performance. Following the marriages, Madonna then hit the stage to perform a slowed-down version of her hit song Open Your Heart, wearing all white (with a cowboy hat to boot).

During and after the performance Grammys viewers took to social media to express their thoughts on the spectacle. Many praised this celebration of marriage equality, and felt the performance was an emotional tribute to the acceptance of gay marriage....

Though most of the reactions to the performance were positive, not everyone was a fan of the event. Some viewers felt the mass wedding was gimmicky and nothing but a publicity stunt, while others still took a moral stance against the performance. John Gray, an associate teaching pastor at Lakewood Church, felt the performance was a dishonour, tweeting that “adding clear church imagery is wrong.” Bryan Fischer, a director of issue analysis at the American Family Association, felt the wedding ceremonies were “sodomy-based.”

Heads up: Grammy telecast to feature sodomy-based wedding ceremonies. http://t.co/pbdVOkYuG8
— Bryan Fischer (@BryanJFischer) January 26, 2014

@dglasscock Exactly!!!! Getting sick of it.
— Sandy Koch (@sandylkoch) January 27, 2014

I said to mom "you still watching the Grammy awards" She texted back & said "I was until this fag started singing" 😂😂😂💀💀💀
— ebh•♛ (@_BrookexO__) January 27, 2014

The mass wedding ceremony at the end of Ryan Lewis/Macklemore was perplexing. Marriage is not a circus event, it's sacred.
— Katie Newingham (@KatieNewingham) January 27, 2014

Total mockery of God on the Grammys tonight! The world has gone gay-mad! And it is sickening! http://t.co/diYnT3ONGz
— BusterWilson (@busterwilson) January 27, 2014

Praying for Next Generation as Grammy Awards Show pushes the Gay Marriage agenda on our kids watching.Why have wedding on music award show?
— Kenny Hibbard (@kennyhibbard) January 27, 2014

@CBS CBS: Shame on you, the Grammy's is supposed to be a family friendly show. It was disgusting, and sick to have gay marriages.
— Dr R Joseph Milligan (@parsonjoe1) January 27, 2014

Added: From the Mad Jewess, "Over-whelming Huge Majority People Are SICK of the *PROMOTION* of Homosexuality In U.S. & I’ll Prove It."

Macklemore's 9/11 Truther Tweet

The tweet's still up but folks have it on screencap for good measure.

At Twitchy, "‘Bush knocked down the towers’: Is Macklemore a 9/11 truther?"



More, "Flashback: Mr. Macklemore goes to Washington."

Oh My! Michele Bachmann Slams Socialist Bernie Sanders on Obama's 'War on Women'

I was watching this, heh.

Bachmann just destroys the hapless socialist senator from Vermont!

And Mediaite has the full video, "Michele Bachmann vs. Bernie Sanders CNN Debate Goes Completely Off the Rails":

For much of the debate it appeared the Bachmann and Sanders were talking simultaneously, while a seemingly helpless Blitzer sat on the sidelines choosing not to moderate in the traditional sense.

When Sanders said Republicans want to cut Social Security, Bachmann shot back with, “That is absolutely a lie. It’s brought up all the time and it’s a lie. Let’s face it, Senator Sanders. you shouldn’t be lying about what our position is.” When he asked her directly if she supports “chained CPI” and raising the minimum wage, Bachmann would not answer, choosing instead to direct the points she was trying to make straight towards Blitzer. Meanwhile, Bachmann had to pause several times throughout the conversation to tell Sanders to “calm down.”

The @cnn booker who put Michele Bachmann and Bernie Sanders on together should get a raise.

— Karen Tumulty (@ktumulty) January 27, 2014

.@KTumulty VIDEO: Bachman: Obama created war on women: http://t.co/binHhp20nP #TCOT #TGDN

— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) January 27, 2014

Marlboro Man Eric Lawson Dead: Smoking-Related Illness Cited

A phenomenally successful ad campaign by the cigarette maker.

But cigarettes kill, no need to be PC about it. My mom had major lung surgery last year after some 50-odd years of smoking. She's lucky to be alive. My wife's mom died of lung cancer sometime back, and her dad gave up cigarettes a few years ago after saying he'd never quit. At some point mortality stares you in the face and you realize smoking's not worth it --- although I'm not an anti-smoking activist. Folks should be able to enjoy a smoke if they want it. The problem is that they're so addictive. I smoked for a couple of years when I was going to Hollywood all the time. A cigarette and a cup of coffee is a major stimulation feed! Amazing even, the kick you get out of the nicotine (once you get use to it). Not glamorous anymore, although I still admire the rugged look sometimes. It's part of the culture.

In any case, at London's Daily Mail, "Former Marlboro Man, 72, becomes FIFTH actor from iconic cigarette ads to die of lung disease."

Lawson died of respiratory failure from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Cool Ringo Starr Shout-Out to Wolf Blitzer

Yeah, because Wolf's cool like that.

.@WolfBlitzer Dude, congrats on that Ringo Starr shout out, heh! http://t.co/dl3k2V5hLo

— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) January 27, 2014

Greta Van Susteren Attacks Erick Erickson

My money's on Greta.

At Politico, "Van Susteren: Erick Erickson is 'a jerk!'"

And follow the links on Twitter.

@gretawire calls out @EWErickson for sexist tweets http://t.co/PcNnJJKHxu
— Luke Johnson (@johnson) January 27, 2014

Giant African Land Snails

Crazy.

At Instapundit, "EVERYTHING SEEMINGLY IS SPINNING OUT OF CONTROL: Foot-Long, Sex-Crazed Snails That Pierce Tires and Devour Houses."

Hillary Clinton: My Biggest Regret Is What Happened In Benghazi...'

In 2008 I had a lot of respect for Hillary Clinton, particularly with respect to Barack Obama (who I wanted to lose). But this last four years was a revelation on this woman's politics, and especially Hillary's politics of "what difference does it make?"

CNN has the video on her Benghazi comments today, "Former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton speaks at NADA."

And at Memeorandum, "Clinton's biggest regret at State: Benghazi."

And from Gateway Pundit, "What Difference Does It Make?… Hillary Says Biggest Regret “Is What Happened in Benghazi”."

Screw #BDS: Scarlett Johansson in Sexy Super Bowl Commercial for SodaStream

Following up on my earlier entry, "Scarlett Johansson and the (BDS) Politics of Celebrity Ambassadors."

Here's some updates from Commentary and People Magazine:

Demonizing Israel; Demonizing ScarJo : http://t.co/AbDsGgsCfs @Commentary

— Commentary Magazine (@Commentary) January 27, 2014

Watch Scarlett Johansson's sexy Super Bowl ad for SodaStream http://t.co/CzPOk6uCDF

— People magazine (@peoplemag) January 27, 2014

Alabama Crimson Tide Quarterback A.J. McCarron Slams Grammys as 'Pretty Demonic'

Well, they we're that bad after all.

But see USA Today, "AJ McCarron was pretty creeped out by the Grammy Awards."

And at SB Nation, "AJ McCarron is scared of Katy Perry."

Is it just me or are some of the Grammy performances so far seem to be really demonic?? Looks like there is a lot of evil in the world..

— AJ McCarron (@10AJMcCarron) January 27, 2014

Rand Paul’s Paleolibertarian Patrimony

Dave Swindle used to repeatedly warn against backing Rand Paul, arguing that he was a carbon copy of his father Ron. See, for example, "The One Question Conservative Rand Paul Supporters Need to Answer," and "Was Sarah Palin Snookered Into Endorsing a Stealth Anti-Israel Candidate?"

But I thought he gave a great speech to the Heritage Foundation last year, and I've mentioned my possible support for a Rand Paul presidential bid in 2016. As always, the proof will be how genuine his views turn out to be. That being said, you know hard-left outlets like the New York Times would love to destroy him, so take this exegesis of Paul's ideological "patrimony" with the usual grain of salt.

See, "Rand Paul’s Mixed Inheritance":

As Rand Paul test-markets a presidential candidacy and tries to broaden his appeal, he is also trying to take libertarianism, an ideology long on the fringes of American politics, into the mainstream. Midway through his freshman term, he has become a prominent voice in Washington’s biggest debates — on government surveillance, spending and Middle East policy.

In the months since he commanded national attention and bipartisan praise for his 13-hour filibuster against the Obama administration’s drone strike program, Mr. Paul has impressed Republican leaders with his staying power, in part because of the stumbles of potential rivals and despite some of his own.

“Senator Paul is a credible national candidate,” said Mitt Romney, who ran for president as the consummate insider in 2012. “He has tapped into the growing sentiment that government has become too large and too intrusive.” In an email, Mr. Romney added that the votes and dollars Mr. Paul would attract from his father’s supporters could help make him “a serious contender for the Republican nomination.”

But if Mr. Paul reaps the benefits of his father’s name and history, he also must contend with the burdens of that patrimony. And as he has become a politician in his own right and now tours the circuit of early primary states, Mr. Paul has been calibrating how fully he embraces some libertarian precepts.

“I want to be judged by who I am, not by a relationship,” Mr. Paul, a self-described libertarian Republican, said in an interview last week. “I have wanted to develop my own way, and my own, I guess, connections to other intellectual movements myself when I came to Washington.”

Coming of age in America’s first family of libertarianism — he calls his father, a three-time presidential aspirant, “my hero” — Rand Paul was steeped in a narrow, rightward strain of the ideology, according to interviews, documents, and a review of speeches, articles and books.

Some of its adherents have formulated provocative theories on race, class and American history, and routinely voice beliefs that go far beyond the antiwar, anti-big-government, pro-civil-liberties message of the broader movement that has attracted legions of college students, Silicon Valley entrepreneurs and Tea Party activists.

That worldview, often called “paleolibertarianism,” emerges from the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Alabama, started with money raised by the senior Mr. Paul. It is named for the Austrian émigré who became an intellectual godfather of modern libertarian economic thinking, devoted to an unrestricted free market.

Some scholars affiliated with the Mises Institute have combined dark biblical prophecy with apocalyptic warnings that the nation is plunging toward economic collapse and cultural ruin. Others have championed the Confederacy. One economist, while faulting slavery because it was involuntary, suggested in an interview that the daily life of the enslaved was “not so bad — you pick cotton and sing songs.”

Mr. Paul says he abhors racism, has never visited the institute and should not have to answer for the more extreme views of all of those in the libertarian orbit.

“If you were to say to someone, ‘Well, you’re a conservative Republican or you are a Christian conservative Republican, does that mean that you think when the earthquake happened in Haiti that was God’s punishment for homosexuality?’ Well, no,” he said in an earlier interview. “It loses its sense of proportion if you have to go through and defend every single person about whom someone says is associated with you.”

Still, his 2011 book, “The Tea Party Goes to Washington,” praises some institute scholars, recommending their work and the institute website.

And he has sometimes touched on themes far from the mainstream. He has cautioned in the past of a plan to create a North American Union with a single currency for the United States, Mexico and Canada, and a stealth United Nations campaign to confiscate civilian handguns. He has repeatedly referred to the “tyranny” of the federal government.

Since becoming a national figure, Mr. Paul has generally stayed on safer ground. His denunciations of government intrusion on Americans’ privacy have been joined by lawmakers in both parties and have resonated with the public — though no other member of Congress as yet has joined him in his planned class-action suit against the National Security Agency.

He has renounced many of the isolationist tenets central to libertarianism, backed away from his longstanding objections to parts of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and teamed with members of the Congressional Black Caucus in calling for an easing of drug-sentencing laws. He recently unveiled a plan for investment in distressed inner cities.

Much of that is in keeping with the left-right alliance Mr. Paul promotes, an alternative to what he dismisses as a “mushy middle.” Such partnerships, he says, “include people who firmly do believe in the same things, that happen to serve in different parties.”

In recent months, potential rivals for leadership of the Republican Party have depicted him as an extremist. Before the recent investigations into political abuses by his administration, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey said Mr. Paul’s “strain of libertarianism” was “very dangerous.” And Senator Ted Cruz of Texas told donors in New York that in a national campaign Mr. Paul could not escape Ron Paul’s ideological history.

Mr. Paul is not the first political son encumbered by a father’s legacy, but his mantle is unusually heavy. He has been his father’s apprentice, aide, surrogate and, finally, successor. Side-by-side portraits of father and son adorn one wall in his Senate conference room...

Still more at the link. The piece goes into some detail on the "fringe" paleos like Lew Rockwell (who had a thing for Cindy Sheehan sometime back) and Murray Rothbard. And it mentions how Rand, right before announcing his run for office in 2009, he appeared on nutjob Alex Jones' radio program. There's a lot of unsavory conspiracists and racists in those swamps, and frankly, just being Rand Paul he may never fully escape them.