U.S. Has Few Options in #Ukraine

Here's the analysis at the front-page of this morning's Wall Street Journal, "Obama Has Few Options to Challenge Russia on Ukraine: U.S. Administration Shifts to Sterner Tone With Moscow, Voicing Concern on Military Moves" (via Google):

WASHINGTON—Until Friday, the American approach to Ukraine's mounting crisis was designed explicitly to show the U.S. didn't view this as a return of Cold War frictions, but as an opportunity to work with Moscow to stabilize a former Soviet state.

That changed late in the day when President Barack Obama bluntly warned Russia against intervening in Ukraine, a stark indication that old tensions are seeping back into the relationship.

"We are now deeply concerned about military movements taken by the Russian Federation inside of Ukraine," Mr. Obama said. "Just days after the world came to Sochi for the Olympic Games, it would invite the condemnation of nations around the world."

The statement, delivered in a rare late-afternoon appearance at the White House press room, was an indication of the mounting concern in Washington that Russian President Vladimir Putin may be prepared to take drastic steps to keep Ukraine in Moscow's orbit. It sent a message that Mr. Putin should be under no illusions about the damage such steps would wreak.

The White House had been cautious in its comments on Ukraine. Since Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych's overthrow a week ago, the administration avoided casting the revolution there as a victory for the West.

Mr. Obama's latest statements, like those of other top U.S. officials this week, lacked any indication of what the U.S. would do in response to a Russian military incursion. The warnings did, however, underscore the limited range of available options.

The U.S. has started talks with European partners about what steps they could take in response to Russian actions in Ukraine, including the possibility of the U.S. and its European allies boycotting the upcoming Group of Eight meeting in Sochi, according to U.S. officials.

The U.S. is also considering withholding some trade and commercial benefits which the Russians have been seeking. Russia currently has a team in Washington to discuss deepening trade and commercial ties.

The George W. Bush administration didn't move to enact sanctions against Moscow in 2008 after Russian tank columns annexed territories in the Western-leaning former Soviet republic of Georgia.

Washington increased financial aid to Georgia in the aftermath and tried to accelerate its membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the European Union.

European officials are in a similar bind. They are seeking to work with Russia on Ukraine even when they appear to be pursuing conflicting objectives. European Council President Herman Van Rompuy spoke with Mr. Putin Friday afternoon and discussed the "financial and security situation" in Ukraine, the EU said.

Still, a growing number of U.S. lawmakers and American allies said this week that Mr. Obama needs to do more to directly challenge Mr. Putin and acknowledge that the Kremlin's leader isn't an American partner.

Not doing so, they said, could lead the Kremlin to take even more aggressive steps to try and shape the future in Ukraine. It also could lead Russia to continue challenging U.S. interests in Europe, the Middle East and Asia.

"Someone needs to tell [the administration] the restart button is jammed," said a senior Arab official who's involved in Syria and Iran diplomacy. "Even on a good day—without Ukraine, Syria, Georgia, or Iran—the Russians won't play ball with you."

More at the link.

And previously, "Charles Krauthammer: Obama Tells the World We Aren't Going to Do Anything About Invasion of #Ukraine."

Look, Putin could fully annex Ukraine, like Hitler's Anschluss of Austria in 1938, and the U.S. under this administration would do virtually nothing to stop him. The options are extremely limited, indeed. But the force of presidential personality here is totally lacking. We're miles from willing to "pay any price, bear any burden" to guarantee the survival of Ukraine's liberty. It's pretty sad, actually.

Invasion of the Crimean Peninsula

Here's a follow up to yesterday's entry featuring political scientist Kim Zisk, "Russian Invasion of Ukraine?"

I think we're past the question of whether Russia will invade now, although when Zisk was writing it was probably still just "paramilitary forces" who were "patrolling" the Crimean airports.

It's way beyond that. Zero Hedge tweeted this out from Contemporary Issues & Geography earlier:

#MAP #INFOGRAPHIC #Crimea #russiainvadesukraine #Ukraine http://t.co/xgWSSbzn8V as of March 1st 1600GMT+1 pic.twitter.com/tpBN6We43k
— CIGeography (@CIGeography) March 1, 2014

Professor Zisk has an update, "Putin's Biggest Mistake: The Real Stakes of Intervening In Ukraine."

And see Robert Stacy McCain, "The New Crimean War."

U.S. Diplomatic Efforts Failing to Resolve Crisis in #Ukraine

From Colum Lynch, at Foreign Policy:

President Obama's diplomatic effort to head off a violent breakup of Ukraine ran aground Saturday as a top U.N. envoy was blocked from a peace mission to the disputed region of Crimea and Russia's parliament, or Duma, approved a request by Russian President Vladimir Putin to send military forces to Ukraine in support of pro-Russian Ukrainians.

The White House and other European governments have been pressing for international mediation in Ukraine, saying it offered the only hope of reaching a bloodless resolution to the crisis. During a closed-door session of the U.N. Security Council Friday, Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, proposed the U.N. send special envoy Robert Serry to the Crimea to see if he could persuade pro-Russian leaders there to make peace with authorities in Kiev. U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki moon on Friday instructed Serry -- a former Dutch ambassador to Ukraine who currently serves as the U.N. special envoy to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process -- to travel immediately to Crimea.

But Crimea's pro-Russian authorities have refused to extend an invitation to Serry, according to a diplomatic source tracking the peace process. Crimea's newly appointed prime minister has asked Russia for help. Serry, meanwhile, has been unable able to secure a flight to Crimea, where Russian-backed forces have seized control of the main airports, according to diplomatic sources.

Ban's spokesman, Martin Nesirky, told reporters at U.N. headquarters Saturday that the diplomatic mission to Crimea had been called off for now. Serry "had wanted to visit Crimea but this proved to be logistically difficult and therefore he has opted to go to Geneva as initially planned, and this will be to brief the [U.N.] Secretary General," Nesirky said.

Obama sought to breath life into the diplomatic process, telling President Putin during a 90-minute phone call that the Russian leader should address his concerns in Ukraine through direct talks with the Ukrainian government, backed by international mediators, the White House said in a statement. The President also proposed the immediate deployment of international monitors to Ukraine under the auspices of the UN Security Council and the UN and Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Russia, the White House noted, is a member of both organizations, giving it a privileged position to ensure its interests are addressed.

But Obama also warned Putin that Russia's "continued violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity would negatively impact Russia's standing in the international community," according to the White House statement. Obama also told Putin that the United States will suspend participation in preparatory meetings with Russia for the upcoming Group of 8 industrial powers summit. "Russia continued violation of international law will lead to greater political and economic isolation," Obama said.

The Kremlin issued its own readout of the conversation, noting that Putin had defended his decision, claiming that Ukraine's new government had encouraged the "provocative, criminal actions by ultra-nationalists" and threatened ethnic Russians.

"The Russian president underlined that there are real threats to the life and health of Russian citizens and compatriots on Ukrainian territory," according to the statement. "Vladimir Putin stressed that if violence spread further in the eastern regions of Ukraine and in Crimea, Russia reserves the right to protect its interest and those of Russian speakers living there."

Well, diplomacy's all we have right now, although diplomacy without the credibility of international commitments isn't of much use. Russia's going to do what it will, damn the West.

More at the link.

Charles Krauthammer: Obama Tells the World We Aren't Going to Do Anything About Invasion of #Ukraine

I posted Krauthammer's Friday commentary yesterday, "Russian Forces Seize Airports in Crimea in Major Escalation of International Tensions."

And now at National Review, "Krauthammer’s Take: Obama Tells the World We Aren’t Going to Do Anything About Invasion of Ukraine" (via Memeorandum).

Pro-Russia Forces Beat Maidan Occupiers in Kharkiv, Northeast Ukraine

You got the feeling of the enormity of the Ukraine crisis with the woman-in-the-street interview at CBS News I posted the other day. The woman said "Russia will do bad things." And she was scared.

I'm reminded of the woman's genuine fear with the news and images from Kharkiv, at the Washington Post, "In northeast Ukraine, pro-Maidan occupiers are routed by counter-demonstrators":

In pro-Russian Kharkiv today, activists for the revolution are beaten and forced to kneel: pic.twitter.com/onto628G1e via @HromadskeTV #Ukraine

— Simon Shuster (@shustry) March 1, 2014

Amazing shot of #Russia flag replacing #Ukraine flag in city of Kharkiv. http://t.co/PH93CebXWW pic.twitter.com/vRXMwcoWaW

— Jim Roberts (@nycjim) March 1, 2014

KHARKIV, Ukraine — Anger spilled onto the streets in the eastern city of Kharkiv on Saturday as protesters stormed the regional government headquarters, ending the six-day occupation of the building by Ukrainian nationalist activists.

Police stood by as protesters swarmed into the building, beating their opponents and taking prisoners before hoisting Russian and Ukrainian flags at the front door.

Kharkiv is one of several cities across eastern Ukraine where demonstrators with a generally pro-Russian tilt held rallies and raised Russian flags.

The rout occurred during an otherwise peaceful rally in Kharkiv’s Freedom Square, where tens of thousands of people gathered in the morning to protest against the Maidan revolution.

A series of small explosions in the square triggered an angry reaction from the crowd. Hundreds of protesters broke through a police barricade around the regional government building and attacked the occupiers.

The assault on the building was “completely spontaneous,” said Denis Levshinko, a sociology student who participated in the rout of the Maidan occupiers. “We are all fed up with them. We united and we chased them out.”

Levshinko said the protesters clashed with about 500 occupiers, armed with sticks and baseball bats, inside the government building. Many of the activists were taken captive and dragged onto the street, where, forced to their knees, they apologized to the jubilant crowd.

“Beat them, that’s the right thing to do,” shouted one woman. “They should not even be alive.”

Obama Skips Key White House National Security Briefing Amid Worst Territorial Crisis Since End of the Cold War

Again, just short of astonishing.

In August 1990, President George H.W. Bush declared that "a line in the sand" had been crossed by Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait. We saw an intensity to events that's rare in world politics. And we're returning to the intensity with developments in Russia and the Ukraine. Unfortunately, the intensity's everywhere except 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

At Twitchy, "President Empty Chair skips Saturday’s national security meeting?"

And at Weekly Standard, "Obama Skips National Security Team Meeting on Russia, Ukraine."

Full statement from WH official pic.twitter.com/xx13P8TsYd

— Zeke Miller (@ZekeJMiller) March 1, 2014

A senior admin official said POTUS was not at WH national security mtg. But he has been briefed by Nat Sec. Adv Susan Rice and nat sec team.

— Jim Acosta (@JimAcostaCNN) March 1, 2014

Putin warns Obama he could intervene in eastern Ukraine beyond Crimea to protect interests of Russian speakers http://t.co/AiHfxBgHp9

— Jack Grimston (@GrimstonJack) March 1, 2014

Russian Pres Putin speaks with Pres Obama, tells him #russia reserves right to protect its interests in eastern #Ukraine

— Elise Labott (@eliselabottcnn) March 1, 2014

I don't know. At some point things are going to get so big that the entire Western world will be looking at Washington for a decisive green light to intervene with force in Ukraine. Whatever happens, if the use of force is seriously considered, the United States cannot be on the sidelines. These are really monumental maneuvers taking place over there. Like I said on Twitter earlier, Russia's acting like a superpower.

More at Reuters, "Putin tells Obama Russia has right to protect interests in Ukraine," and "WRAPUP 8-Putin ready to invade Ukraine; Kiev warns of war."

Left-Wing Nutjobs Go Full Meltdown Over Obama/Putin Photos Posted by Time's Michael Crowley

This is hilarious!

At Twitchy, "Lefties go full meltdown over Time journo’s side-by-side image of Obama and Putin [pic]."

Lefties go full meltdown over Time journo's side-by-side image of Obama/Putin: http://t.co/yhjcZ4JAnW Especially @NoMoreMister: #ROTFLMAO!

— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) March 1, 2014

Sports Illustrated Breaks the Nude Barrier

Well in this day and age, what are you going to do?

Besides, Sports Illustrated's always been culturally-cool soft pornography.

At the Improper, "Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue Takes Plunge into Full-On Nudity: Crosses Line With Fully Exposed Breasts."

And see Esscurve, "Nina Agdal Breaks Nude Taboo in SI Magazine."

BONUS: At Egotastic!, "Rachel Hunter Called a Classic by Sports Illustrated; We Take a Peek at Rachel Topless in Playboy."

#Ukraine and Our Useless Outrage — Comical Useless Outrage

Seriously. All we've got left is comic relief at this point.

From Victor Davis Hanson, "The history of Obama’s foreign-policy posturing bodes ill for the future of Ukraine":

The U.S. has now shot so many rhetorical arrows that its quiver of indignation is empty — and the world’s troublemakers may know it. An administration that ignores almost all of its own Obamacare deadlines surely cannot expect others to abide by any timetables it sets abroad.

There may be no viable solutions to the violence in Syria or Ukraine. The messes in Egypt and Libya, the Chinese provocations to their neighbors, the North Korean lunacy, and the spiraling violence in Venezuela certainly have no easy answers. But not knowing quite what to do is not the same as knowing certainly what not to do.

Although the U.S. alone seems to honor its promised deadlines of withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq, the world’s aggressors sense that the Obama administration’s bluster will be followed by more bluster. Therefore, they have decided to risk aggrandizements while they can. In the mind of Vladimir Putin, today Ukraine, tomorrow the Baltic States or Eastern Europe. In the minds of the Iranian theocrats, if chemical WMD are okay in Syria, why not nuclear WMD in Iran? In China’s view, when Japan backs off, why shouldn’t Taiwan, South Korea, or the Philippines?

Such a seemingly insignificant loss of deterrence is how wars often start — when an aggressive nation bets that loud words signal that consequences will never follow. So it is emboldened to up the ante to try something even riskier.

America’s step-over line/deadline/red line outrage is long past monotonous and empty — and the result has been an ever scarier world.

Putin Bullying Obama? OMG CNN!

We're screwed.

At Twitchy, "Not a Photoshop: Here’s how CNN is covering Putin and Obama [pic]."

Oh what the sweet flaming fuck! RT @NolteNC: NEVER change, CNN. Don't ever g**damn change --> pic.twitter.com/0iM0Vj02O5

— L (@OrwellForks) March 1, 2014

The West is Caught Flat-Footed in #Ukraine

Well, like I said earlier, Putin knows exactly what he's doing in Ukraine.

See Walter Russell Mead, at the American Interest, "Red Lines In Crimea":

President Obama stepped up to the podium twenty minutes after the announced time for his talk and gave a short, sharply worded but ultimately vague statement on what looks like a growing and intentional Russian military presence in Crimea.

We shall see how things work out, but at first glance President Putin appears to have stolen yet another march on the sputtering West. As I wrote last week, Putin was under pressure to act quickly and run risks; not for the first time, complacent and unobservant Western leaders underestimated Russian decisiveness and determination to surprise. Washington in particular appears to have been caught flat-footed by Russian moves, and even as Kremlin forces fan out across the restive province, President Obama seemed unsure just what Putin intends.

One can already hear a chorus of people discussing Russia’s Crimean move in the terms people used to describe Hitler’s move into the Rhineland. The Germans are only going into their own back garden, said Britain’s Lord Lothian. George Bernard Shaw told the public that it was like the British moving into Portsmouth. Crimea is historically and culturally more a part of Russia than anything else, we are told. It’s a long way from the United States and what happens there doesn’t really matter very much.

While President Obama is unlikely to take the Bernard Shaw line, he now faces a genuinely difficult moment in the troubled course of his second term foreign policy. Two of the President’s highest goals—progress on nuclear arms control in general and a peaceful end to Iran’s nuclear ambitions—depend in large part on Russia’s willingness to act as an American partner. Just as his Syria strategy (talks at Geneva to prepare a political transition) fell horribly flat when the Russians backed away, his Iran and nuclear strategies would face some very rough sledding if Russia’s promises of help prove hollow...

More.

And now here we go, at the New York Times, "Russia's Senate Approves Use of Military Force in Ukraine" (at Memeorandum).

'We like to pay it forward in my family...'

A great story, at the Mirror UK, "Eight-year-old son of dead Iraq veteran hands tear-jerking note of thanks to soldier with $20."

And NewsBusters, "Tearjerker: CBS Spotlights Gold Star Son's Heartfelt Note to National Guardsman."

'Not Everyone Has Two Legs'

At iOWNTHEWORLD, "9 year-old reminds math teacher that not everyone has 2 legs."



More at Twitchy, "Nine-year-old remembers wounded warriors on math assignment."

Driver Falls to His Death After Big-Rig Hits Guardrail on Rainy 210 Freeway in Colton

This is why I don't really like joking about the rain (even though Jimmy Kimmel was cracking me up).

At the Riverside Press-Enterprise, "COLTON: Driver plunges to death off connector road."

Photo: At the Los Angeles Times, "Major storm brings needed rain to L.A., but at a cost."

Lewis Gill's Mom Says One-Punch Killing of Andrew Young Was 'No Big Deal'

At the Mirror UK, "Mum of single punch killer Lewis Gill claims her son's crime was 'no big deal'":

Sherron O'Hagan, 41, said of Andrew Young's death: "It was just an accident. It's not a big deal. All of this will be forgotten about by tomorrow."

That's a f-king cold, heinous murder. The racist black thug should get 20-to-life at minimum.

Also at London's Daily Mail, "Killing a man? 'It's no big deal': A sneer from mother of thug who punched Asperger's sufferer, as Attorney General is deluged with calls to increase sentence." And, "What a sick joke: Four years' jail for thug who'll be out in two after he ended a vulnerable man's life by punching him when he complained about a cyclist on pavement."

Russian Invasion of Ukraine? — UPDATED!

No, it's not an "invasion" yet (thankfully, for Blake Hounshell, at least).

But see Professor Kim Zisk (Kimberley Martin), at Foreign Affairs, "Crimean Punishment: Why Russia Won't Invade Ukraine":

There has been much speculation of late about a possible Russian intervention in Ukraine. After Russia ordered large-scale military exercises on Ukraine’s border earlier this week, for example, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry warned that “any kind of military intervention that would violate the sovereign territorial integrity of Ukraine would be a huge, a grave mistake." And NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen tweeted today, “I urge Russia not to take any action that can escalate tension or create misunderstanding.” It seems that Western policymakers are most worried about two possible scenarios: First, that Russia would embargo gas to Ukraine, and second, that it would invade Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula. Is either of these two really likely?

Keep reading.

Personally, I'm not ruling anything out. Putin could send a couple of hundred thousand troops to "secure" Kiev and Obama wouldn't do a damned thing.

UPDATE: Professor Zisk has revised her unfounded prediction, "Putin's Biggest Mistake The Real Stakes of Intervening In Ukraine," putting the blame for the headline on the editors at the magazine. But she erred in her analysis. Check the link for her new take on events.

Personally, I don't think as many commentators were calling Russia's moves an "invasion" until today (Saturday), and that's how I saw it: as a limited operation to secure Russia's military assets and lines of communication. So, my bad. Interesting spin from Zisk, however:

The title and subtitle were picked by the editors; my read on the situation did not give me certainty that Russia wouldn’t invade Crimea, and indeed I argued that an invasion was likely if there was violence against ethnic Russians there (which is why I urged the Ukrainian government not to rise to the bait by permitting or encouraging anti-Russian violence in Crimea).

Heh. Double negatives are sure to confuse.

But nah. I'd just say events unfolded faster than folks could get an accurate handle on what was going on. "Invasion" indicates more like an armored assault with arrayed infantry divisions, etc. But whatever. It's on now.

'Crimea: No science fiction, no action movie. This is how a Russian airborne invasion looks like...'

It's not the Russian zombie apocalypse, but still.

Video at Live Leak.

Sarah Palin Mocked in 2008 for Warning Putin Might Invade Ukraine if Obama Elected

At Instapundit, "WHO’S DUMB NOW?"

It's former editor of Foreign Policy, Blake Hounshell.

And at Twitchy, "‘Someone has a case of the sads’: Editor who dismissed Sarah Palin’s Russia/Ukraine prediction whines," and "‘I could see this one from Alaska’: Hey journos, ‘stupid’ Sarah Palin was right about Ukraine all along."

You have to admit, this really is something else, heh.

Ha-ha! Oh, those silly, provincial Republicans! pic.twitter.com/6jm5owjI9s
— jimgeraghty (@jimgeraghty) February 28, 2014

Obama Heckled on 'Nuclear War with Russia' at DNC Fundraiser

At Townhall, "Obama Responds to Russia Heckler: 'What the Heck Are You Talking About!?'"

And at the Hill, "Heckler: Obama wants 'nuclear war with Russia'."



RELATED: At Jammie Wearing Fools, "Deeply Somber Obama Following Ukraine Remarks: ‘It’s Officially Happy Hour With the Democratic Party’."

'Ruthless' Arthur Chu on 'Jeopardy'

I watched it last night. And I can see what they mean, heh.

At the Washington Post, "Why we’re actually mad at ruthless ‘Jeopardy!’ contestant Arthur Chu."

Desperately Much-Needed Rain in California!

We do need the rain, and there were some evacuations in Azusa, Glendora and Monrovia yesterday, so not to belittle this. But Jimmy Kimmel is cracking me up.



Seriously, though, here's more on the storm, "Heavy, steady rain soaking Southern California."

Obama Warns Russia Against Military Intervention in Ukraine

Obama's credibility is shot.

Frankly, he's a laughing stock on the international stage. Our foreign rivals can rest assured the U.S. won't lift a finger to defend U.S. strategic interests.

At the Wall Street Journal, "Russia Warned Over Unrest in Ukraine's Crimea Region: Troops Seize Airports, Roads Amid Fears Moscow Is Intervening in Ukraine; Kremlin Denies Involvement":

@LouiseMensch Putin can do anything short of threatening territory of an EU/NATO country & knows nothing will happen other than condemnation

— David Jack (@DJack_Journo) February 28, 2014

Ukraine's new government appeared to lose control over the restive territory of Crimea on Friday after heavily equipped gunmen—possibly Russian soldiers—surrounded its two main airports and armed checkpoints were established on key roads.

Officials in the West reacted with alarm, with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, British Prime Minister David Cameron and others working the phones to Moscow. President Barack Obama publicly told the Russians "there will be costs for any military intervention in Ukraine."

In Kiev, the country's capital, acting President Oleksandr Turchynov went on national television to accuse Russia of "blatant aggression" aimed at provoking a conflict that could lead to the annexation of Ukrainian territory by Moscow.

Top officials in Kiev said the men who had taken over the airport and the roads—who wore unmarked military uniforms and carried automatic weapons—appeared to be Russian soldiers.

Russia denied its forces were involved, and the Russian foreign ministry said what was happening in Ukraine was an internal matter. Russian President Vladimir Putin told concerned European leaders who called him Friday that he opposes any escalation of violence and supports normalizing the situation.

Though the U.S. intelligence community doesn't yet have clarity on the precise nature of troop movements in Crimea, preliminary indications point to a Russian military that is in the process of intervening—despite assurances from Moscow that it would respect Ukraine's territorial integrity, U.S. officials said.

The unrest in Crimea—where Russia maintains a naval base despite ceding control of the territory decades ago—raised the possibility of the de facto partition of Ukraine, a former Soviet republic that gained its independence in 1991...

Continue reading.

More at TCOTs, "Ukraine Recedes Into The Darkness," and the Mad Jewess, "Obama Warned Putin Tonight About Ukraine..."

'Death to Jews' Graffiti Sprayed on Reform Ner Tamid Synagogue in Simferopol

Tweeted the story at Jerusalem Post a little while ago: "‘Death to Jews’ graffiti sprayed on Ukrainian synagogue."

It begins: ‘Death to Jews’ graffiti sprayed on Ukrainian synagogue http://t.co/oYvIHX60xc cc. @MadJewessWoman @BlazingCatFur #Russia #TGDN
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) March 1, 2014

ADDED: From Algemeiner, "Ukraine Synagogue in Crimea Spray Painted With ‘Death to the Jews’."

Kate Moss Photoshoot for Lui Magazine March 2014

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

In Blow to Free Speech, U.S. Ninth Circuit Upholds School Ban on Wearing American Flag T-Shirts

I understand that a high school campus is not the public square, and that school administrators must protect the safety and welfare of their students, but if you can't wear an American flag shirt at an American high school because radical leftist reconquista activists students threaten violence, then this isn't a free America anymore. The forces of leftist anti-speech have truly won the day.

At the Heritage Foundation, "Federal Court Upholds School Ban on American Flag T-Shirts."

And don't miss this outstanding analysis from Eugene Volokh, at the Washington Post, "Not safe to display American flag in American high school":

This is a classic “heckler’s veto” — thugs threatening to attack the speaker, and government officials suppressing the speech to prevent such violence. “Heckler’s vetoes” are generally not allowed under First Amendment law; the government should generally protect the speaker and threaten to arrest the thugs, not suppress the speaker’s speech. But under Tinker‘s “forecast substantial disruption” test, such a heckler’s veto is indeed allowed.

The 9th Circuit decision may thus be a faithful application of Tinker, and it might be that Tinker sets forth the correct constitutional rule here. Schools have special responsibilities to educate their students and to protect them both against violence and against disruption of their educations. A school might thus have the discretion to decide that it will prevent disruption even at the cost of letting thugs suppress speech.

Yet even if the judges are right, the situation in the school seems very bad. Somehow, we’ve reached the point that students can’t safely display the American flag in an American school, because of a fear that other students will attack them for it — and the school feels unable to prevent such attacks (by punishing the threateners and the attackers, and by teaching students tolerance for other students’ speech). Something is badly wrong, whether such an incident happens on May 5 or any other day.

And this is especially so because behavior that gets rewarded gets repeated. The school taught its students a simple lesson: If you dislike speech and want it suppressed, then you can get what you want by threatening violence against the speakers. The school will cave in, the speakers will be shut up, and you and your ideology will win. When thuggery pays, the result is more thuggery. Is that the education we want our students to be getting?

A terrible decision.

UCLA Students Reject Israel Divestment Resolution

William Jacobson had this on Wednesday, at Legal Insurrection, "UCLA Student Council rejects anti-Israel divestment resolution."

Also a MSM report at the Los Angeles Times, "UCLA student government votes against divestment from Israel."

The highlight of this is the meltdown of student notetaker Danielle Dimacali, seen in the video (with a transcript) at Elder of Ziyon, "The epic meltdown of an Israel hater at UCLA (NOW WITH MUSIC VIDEO!)."

And see Daniel Greenfield, at Frontpage Magazine, "Leftists Melt Down Over Failure of UCLA Israel Boycott Resolution":

In the comments section at the Daily Bruin, [student notetaker] Danielle Dimacali accused critics of “obvious blatant racist microaggression”.

I must have never learned civility? Am I supposed to remain submissive? No, I just know when to stand up for what I believe in and what I believe is right. I will not silence myself or censor my language to make you feel more comfortable.

For the record, my job ends after the meeting has been adjourned. I used to consider good and welfare as a safe space for dialogue with the council members, some of those who I consider my closest friends. I am just as justified as getting impassioned over something as the public commenters. The heat of the moment and the intense emotions I felt led to the deluge of tears and strong diction. How dare you call me uncivil, you don’t even know me outside of my reaction to something I found extremely upsetting.

Later Danielle claimed that she was reacting to how upset her friends were and wasn’t against Israel.

Twitter was full of equally vocal meltdowns by BDS supporters upset that their latest racist assault on the Jewish State had fallen short of its goals.

The inevitable Hitler "Downfall" parody video is here, "HITLER REACTS to BDS FAIL at UCLA."

And at the Jewish Press, "The flood of anti-Israel hatred on campuses seems to be losing some of its strength." Well, never count these people out.

Enormous loss for #BDS as #UCLA student council defeats #UCLAdivest resolution >> too bad haters, but we know you'll be back
— Legal Insurrection (@LegInsurrection) February 26, 2014

Still more at Big Government, "Breitbart's Ben Shapiro Crashes UCLA Hearing, Anti-Israel Divestment Fails."

Russian Forces Seize Airports in Crimea in Major Escalation of International Tensions

Charles Krauthammer, as usual, has the best analysis of developments in Ukraine, at the Washington Post, "Putin’s Ukraine gambit."

Personally, I'm just short of astonished at how brazen Putin's moves are. A lot of thought has gone into Russia's exercise of power, cold calculation and strategic planning. It's putting the U.S. on defense. Statements from top U.S. officials sound like squeaks amid the roar of the Russian bear.

.@MadJewessWoman The news today will define the remaining three years of the Obama administration. Russia's acting like a superpower.
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) February 28, 2014

I'll have more throughout the day. Meanwhile, a roundup of the news and analysis (in no particular order).

At the Los Angeles Times, "Russian gunmen patrol airports in tense Crimean standoff."

And at the Lede, "Latest Updates on the Tensions in Ukraine," and Telegraph UK, "Ukraine crisis live: Russia admits its troops are moving in Crimea."

More at Toronto's Globe and Mail, "Ukraine pleads for U.S., U.K. help after Russian 'invasion'," and at Foreign Policy, "New Ukraine Government Asks U.N. to Help Ease Crisis."

Finally, at the Trumpet, "Ukraine Crisis: Russia Displays Its Power."

Britain's Nazi Spies in World War II

They got punk'd.

Pretty fascinating, at the Independent UK, "Enemy within: The network of Britons who spied for Hitler during Second World War":

To his circle of fervent recruits, he was “Jack King” – the Gestapo’s man in England. While Britons rallied to war against Hitler in 1940, the masterful Nazi agent toured the country signing up those who could be trusted to show their loyalty to the Fatherland when the time came.

For five years, King evaded detection as he built up a coterie of committed and ruthless British Nazis ranging from provincial engineers, to an astrologer, to a Catholic priest. In return, they provided him with some of the most sensitive secrets of Britain’s war machine, from details of the first jet fighter to the workings of radar countermeasures.

Such was his success that by 1945, King had built up a list of “hundreds” of Britons whose anti-Semitic zeal and desire for a German victory made them potential “fifth columnists” against their own country. His controllers noted that all held “pro-German sentiments or a potential  fascist political outlook”. The Third Reich was particularly appreciative of the seven subversives – all but one of them British and led by a “crafty and dangerous” fascist named Marita Perigoe – who formed the inner circle of King’s network of homegrown Nazis.

Along with cash and regular supplies of invisible ink, Berlin sent them Iron Crosses in recognition of their services.

What Marita and her comrades did not know was that rather than working for the Gestapo, they were unwitting servants of Britain’s MI5 and thus the targets of one of the most audacious – and hitherto unknown – deceptions of the Second World War.

The scheme – known variously as the Fifth Column or SR Case – is revealed for the first time today in Security Service files released at the National Archives in Kew, west London.

They detail how Britain managed to dupe – and then contain – an entire class of homegrown traitors throughout the war and beyond. Even more remarkably, the operation relied almost entirely on Jack King, an MI5 desk officer drafted in at short notice to pose as the Gestapo’s British kingpin.

The project ran on similar lines to the famous Double Cross system under which the intelligence services turned German agents and then fed misinformation to the Nazi high command throughout the war on subjects including, crucially, the plans for the  D-Day landings.

But while British duplicity has long been recognised as playing a vital role in both shortening and winning the war by misleading the enemy, the willingness of “scores” of Britons to undermine their country and the effectiveness of the Security Service in curtailing their ambitions has, until now, remained unknown...

Continue reading.

'Any day you can see a member of the snarky, self-righteous Gawker media empire peeing his pants in the back of a cab driven by a mustachioed Jeff Gordon is a good day...'

From Mary Katharine Ham, at Hot Air, "Video: Jeff Gordon pranks blogger who said his first “Test Drive” was fake":

America and the Aggressive (Regressive) Left

From Peggy Noonan, at the Wall Street Journal, "Half the country feels—and is—beset by government. That's not progress":

The constant mischief of the progressive left is hurting the nation's morale. There are few areas of national life left in which they are not busy, and few in which they're not making it worse. There are always more regulations, fees and fiats, always more cultural pressure and insistence.

The president brags he has a pen and a phone. He uses the former to sign executive orders. It is not clear why he mentioned the latter since he rarely attempts to bring legislators over to his side. Who exactly is he calling? The most hopeful thing he's done is signal this week what he'll be up to after he leaves. He will work with young minority men. Good. He is a figure of inspiration to them, and they need and deserve encouragement. This also leaves us understanding for the first time the true purpose of his so far unsuccessful presidency: to launch a meaningful postpresidency. I'm glad that's clear.

But to American morale. Here one refers to recent polling data. Gallup in December had 72% of those polled saying big government is a bigger threat to the future than big business and big labor—a record high. This may be connected to ObamaCare, an analyst ventured. Rasmussen this week had only 32% of those polled saying the country is headed in the right direction, with 61% saying we're on the wrong track. Both numbers fluctuate, but the right track is down two points since this time last year and the wrong track up three. Gallup also had only 39% of respondents saying they saw America in a positive position, with less than half thinking it will be better in five years.

None of these numbers are new, exactly, as they reflect long-term trends. But they never lose their power to startle. The persistent blues, the lack of faith, the bet that things won't get better—it just doesn't sound like America.

We are suffering in great part from the politicization of everything and the spread of government not in a useful way but a destructive one. Everyone wants to help the poor, the old and the sick; the safety net exists because we want it. But voters and taxpayers feel bullied, burdened and jerked around, which again is not new but feels more intense every day. Common sense and native wit tell them America is losing the most vital part of itself in the continuing shift of power from private to public. Rules, regulations, many of them stupid, from all the agencies—local, state, federal—on the building of a house, or the starting of a business. You can only employ so many before the new insurance rules kick in so don't employ too many, don't take a chance! Which means: Don't grow. It takes the utmost commitment to start a school or improve an existing one because you'll come up against the unions, which own the politicians.

It's all part of the malaise, the sclerosis. So is the eroding end of the idea that religious scruples and beliefs have a high place that must culturally and politically be respected. The political-media complex is bravely coming down on florists with unfashionable views. On twitter Thursday the freedom-fighter who tweets as @FriedrichHayek asked: "Can the government compel a Jewish baker to deliver a wedding cake on a Saturday? If not why not." Why not indeed. Because the truly tolerant give each other a little space? On an optimistic note, the Little Sisters of the Poor haven't been put out of business and patiently await their day in court...

They're hateful and regressive, and they're indeed destroying this once great nation.

Pro-Russia Gunmen Seize Parliament in Ukraine's Crimea

This is getting to be like some real great power politics. Almost like old times, frankly.

At the Washington Post, "Pro-Russia separatists flex muscle in Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula":

SIMFEROPOL, Ukraine — The revolutionary upheaval in Ukraine’s faraway capital has awakened the separatist dreams of ethnic Russians living here on the Crimean Peninsula, where on Thursday pro-Russia gunmen who occupied the regional parliament building were met with an outpouring of support.

A group of men dressed in camouflage and armed with rocket-­propelled grenades entered the building early Thursday in the capital of Ukraine’s Crimea region, according to local reporters, then barricaded themselves inside and raised the Russian flag on the roof — a succinct answer to warnings from the United States and Europe that Ukraine remain united and Russia stand back.

Also at Time, "Gunmen Seize Parliament in Ukraine’s Russian Stronghold":

Since revolutionaries took over Ukraine’s capital a week ago, the ethnic Russian majority in the Crimea has largely refused to recognize the new government. In some Crimean cities, citizens have begun forming pro-Russian militias to resist the new authorities. “There’s not a chance in hell we’re going to accept the rule of that fascist scum,” Sergei Bochenko, the commander of a local militia group in the Crimea, told TIME last week in the city of Sevastopol. He said his battalion was armed with assault rifles and had begun training to “defend our land.”

Resting on the southern tip of the Crimean peninsula, Sevastopol is home to a major Russian military base. Some of its ethnic Russian citizens have appealed for Moscow‘s help to protect them from the new government, which they widely believe to be a fascist force backed by the United States and European Union.

On Thursday, as the siege unfolded in the Crimean capital, Russia received a similar appeal from Yanukovych, Ukraine’s ousted president, who is wanted in his homeland on charges of mass murder after police under his command slaughtered dozens of protesters last week. “As before, I consider myself the rightful head of the Ukrainian state,” he wrote in an appeal distributed to the press. “My allies and I have received threats of revenge, urging me to ask the authorities of the Russian Federation to ensure my personal safety from the actions of extremists,” he added, referring to the revolutionaries.

So far, Russia has refused all appeals to interfere in Ukraine. On Tuesday, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said during a trip to the E.U. that Russia had “confirmed our principled position of nonintervention in Ukraine’s internal affairs.” But a few days earlier, on Feb. 22, a senior delegation of Russian officials attended a summit of officials from the fallen regime and, in a resolution passed at the summit, called on Ukrainians to form militias to resist the revolutionary government.

“The provocateurs are on the march,” Ukraine’s acting Interior Minister, Arsen Avakov, said in reaction to the seizure of the Crimean parliament.

Still more at the Los Angeles Times, "Ukraine's fugitive president turns up in Russia."

Caroline Glick: The Israeli Solution

Caroline writes, at Frontpage:

In its annual survey of American Jewry published last October, the American Jewish Committee found that 75 percent of American Jews agree with the statement, “The goal of the Arabs is not a peaceful two-state agreement with Israel, but rather the destruction of Israel.”

And yet, American Jews supported the establishment of a Palestinian state 50% to 47%.

Next week over 10,000 predominantly Jewish Americansupporters of Israel will gather in Washington at AIPAC’s annual policy conference. Given their high commitment to Israel, probably most of those gathered belong to the 47% of American Jews who opposed Palestinian statehood.

Yet at the conference they will embrace the two-state formula. And on March 4 they will go up to Capitol Hill and tell their representatives that they support it.

They will do so not because they are addled. They will do so because for the past 20 years all they have heard is that Israel has no alternative to the two-state plan.

Israel’s fervent and committed supporters at AIPAC have been told that Israel needs a Palestinian state more than the PLO does. Only by bringing such a state into existence in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem can Israel get the Palestinian demographic albatross off its neck.

These committed supporters of the Jewish state have been sternly lectured that Israel is doomed if it doesn’t give the Palestinians an outlet for their political impulses outside of Israel, because within a year or two there will be more Palestinians than Israelis west of the Jordan.

The same day AIPAC’s delegates meet with members of both houses of Congress, my new book, The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East, will be released by Crown Forum, a division of Random House.

In my book, I show that the demographic time bomb is a dud, and a malicious one at that.

In 1997, the head of the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics Hassan Abu Libdeh told The New York Times that he was carrying out a census which would serve as a “civil intifada,” that is, as a statistical terror assault.

And he was right. The goal of terrorism is to force a target population to take actions it otherwise would not have taken. The goal of statistical warfare is to manipulate numbers to coerce a target society into taking actions that it would otherwise not take.

The Palestinian census claimed that by 2015, Arabs would be the majority west of the Jordan River. And once Jews were the minority, the Arabs could destroy Israel just by demanding the vote.

The Clinton administration, the US Jewish leadership and theIsraeli Left rushed to embrace the findings, even though they were totally inconsistent with annual Palestinian population surveys the Israeli military government conducted from 1967 through 1996.

All crowed that true, the PLO still supports terrorism, but if Israel didn’t cough up the territories, it would be demographically overwhelmed.

It took seven years until an independent group of Israeli and American researchers studied the PLO data and exposed the fraud at their foundation. The American- Israeli Demographic Research Group showed that the Palestinian data inflated the Arab population by a whopping 50 percent.

The news for Israel has only gotten better in the intervening years. The Jewish fertility rate has increased as the Palestinian rates have collapsed along with those of the Muslim world as a whole. Israeli Jews now have higher fertility rates than the Arabs of Judea and Samaria, (3.04 vs. 2.91 children per woman). Israel’s immigration rate is high and rising. Palestinian emigration rates have skyrocketed over the past decade.

The demographic good news has percolated throughout Israeli society. And with the news, more and more Israeli politicians have come to favor applying Israeli law to all or parts of Judea and Samaria, just as Israel successfully applied its laws to united Jerusalem and the Golan Heights in the past.

Most Likud members of Knesset and all members of the Bayit Yehudi party support partial or full implementation of Israeli law in the areas. 59% of Israeli Jews support such action as well and support doing so unilaterally.

Indeed, even leftist Israelis support Israel’s unilateral application of its laws to parts of Judea and Samaria. For instance, former ambassador to the US Michael Oren supports the unilateral withdrawal from parts of Judea and Samaria. But Oren foresees the retention of the major Israeli settlement blocs under Israeli law. In the absence of a peace deal, such a step can only be taken through the unilateral application of Israeli law to those areas.

In the current Knesset session, members have submitted two bills calling for the application of Israeli law to the large Israeli population centers in Judea and Samaria and to the Jordan Valley, respectively.

But while all of this is going on in Israel, Israel’s supporters in the US remain in the dark about the existence of a better – facts based – alternative path for Israel.

In The Israeli Solution, I fill in the blanks that plague the American discourse on Israel and the Palestinians...

Continue reading.

PRE-ORDER at Amazon: The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East.

'The battle for control of the U.S. Senate is where the action is this year in American politics...'

I'm getting a kick out of this Alan Abramowitz piece at Sabato's Crystal Ball, "Generic Ballot Model Shows Senate Control at Tipping Point." (Via Memeorandum.)

I've been using the phrase "the Senate is where the action is" for some time now in my analyses of the November midterms, most recently this morning, "Republicans Stronger Than Democrats for November Midterms":

As I've reported many times, analysts don't expect much change in the House of Representatives, and in fact Democrats have little chance of retaking the chamber in the fall. But as I've said, it's the Senate where the real action is, and some experts suggest the Democrats could be looking at losses of close to 10 seats (the GOP needs 6 seats to capture the majority).

So, take a look at Abramowitz's conditional forecasts for the Senate in November based on the generic congressional ballot for U.S. House races:

The conditional forecasts in Table 2 above make clear once again that the fundamentals in 2014 are very favorable for Republicans in the Senate elections. Even if Democrats have a 10-point lead in generic ballot polling in early September, Republicans would still be expected to gain between three and four Senate seats because of the GOP advantage on the seat exposure and midterm party variables. However, a Democratic lead of five or more points in generic ballot polling would give Democrats a better than 50/50 chance of retaining control of the Senate. On the other hand, a Republican lead of five or more points would almost ensure a GOP majority in next year’s Senate.

The predictions are based on the September generic ballot, which is not due for six months. Yesterday's New York Times generic ballot question had the GOP up 42 to 39 over the Democrats, however, so if nothing changes based on the numbers right now, Republicans would be just short of Abramowitz's R+5, and thus sitting roughly on a pickup of the six seats necessary to take the majority in the upper chamber.

As I noted this morning, I doubt there's going to be much change in the national polling environment to change the fundamentals of this modelling (Obama's approval ratings and changes in the unemployment rate, etc.), but we'll see. It's still a long way off until the September-November stretch.

I'll have more, as always.

Many Chinese Couples Say One Child Is Enough — Even Now That They Can Have Two

At the New York Times, "Many in China Can Now Have a Second Child, but Say No":

BEIJING — After three decades of a Chinese policy that limits most families to one child, many families say they will not take advantage of a major change allowing a second child because of the rising cost of child-rearing.

“With two kids you have less money to give them the best,” said Mao Xiaodan, 27, a Beijing lawyer seven weeks into her first pregnancy who has dismissed the prospect of a second child. She said she was concerned about stratospheric housing prices and the high cost of schooling. “My husband’s co-worker has twins,” she said, “and just paying for elementary school has nearly bankrupted him.”

Under the new policy, the most significant overhaul of China’s family planning rules in 30 years, married couples in which just one parent is an only child can also have a second baby. The previous rules allowed two children for couples in which both parents are only children. The old policy also made exceptions for China’s officially recognized ethnic minorities and rural couples whose first child was a girl or disabled.

The government estimates that the change will allow an additional 15 million to 20 million couples to expand their families, helping to stem a plummeting birthrate that experts say has left China with a dangerous demographic imbalance in both age and sex. But only about half of those couples are willing to have two children, according to research by the National Health and Family Planning Commission cited in state news media.

In interviews, many couples blamed the rising cost of living for their reluctance to have more than one child. Some cited a persistent cultural norm that requires husbands to provide an apartment, a car and other material riches to a bride, demands that can push an extended family deep into debt.

The Chinese government should get out of the child regulation business. It's a massive violation of human rights. If families decide they want just one baby, then it's their choice.

More here. (State planners screwed up, by the looks of it. Chinese demographic numbers are so messed up there won't be enough new births to correct the imbalance against young people and women.)

Republicans Stronger Than Democrats for November Midterms

This is a "generic ballot" poll on party prospects for the November elections to the House of Representatives, at NYT, "G.O.P., Though Deeply Split, Has Election Edge, Poll Shows." (At Memeorandum.)

The poll finds that 42 percent say they'll support GOP candidates in November and 39 percent like the Democrats -- a statistically insignificant result since it's within the polls margin of error. But here's the findings on the ObamaCare clusterf-k: The nationwide poll was conducted Feb. 19 to 23 by landline and cellphone among 1,644 adults and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points for all adults and plus or minus 6 points for Republicans, Democrats and independents. The survey comes more than eight months before Election Day, and less than a quarter of those who responded said they were paying a lot of attention to the 2014 election, meaning that each party has ample opportunity to sway voters.

One issue, though — the Affordable Care Act — seems to have solidified some opposition to Democrats, and historical trends such as an older, whiter midterm electorate are also favorable to Republicans.

“It seems all the Democrats are for Obamacare, and I think this is a really bad deal,” Larry Walker, an independent voter from Torrance, Calif., said in a follow-up interview.

Mr. Obama’s approval rating is now at 41 percent, with 51 percent of Americans saying they disapprove of his performance, his worst standing in the past two years, with the exception of a CBS News survey last November in the midst of the troubled rollout of the new health care law. Such ratings amount to an early political alarm for Democrats on the ballot this year. When a party controls the White House, its performance in midterm congressional elections typically tracks closely to the popularity of the sitting president in the fall.

There's much in there that's unfavorable to the Republicans, but frankly 2014's looking to be a referendum on the Democrat Party's performance on the economy and healthcare, and they're not coming up roses.

Here's the raw survey questionnaire at the New York Times, "Complete Results: New York Times/CBS News February Poll." President Obama's job disapproval on the economy is 57 percent. And the level of dissatisfaction with the way things are going in Washington is nearly off the charts. Almost half of those polled said they were "dissatisfied but not angry" (49 percent), and then another 30 percent are "angry" (a total of 79 percent unhappy campers). Also, on another measure, 37 percent are "very disappointed" with the Obama presidency, while 22 percent are "disappointed" (a total of 59 percent who are "disappointed" with this administration). And in separate questions, voters said that both parties needed to do much more to address "the needs and concerns of middle class voters" (75 percent said Republicans should do more and 69 said Democrats should do more). Finally, exactly half thought Congress should make changes to ObamaCare "to make it work better" while 42 percent thought it should be "repealed entirely."

In sum, basic bread-and-butter issues are driving voter concerns this year, and neither party is seen well among respondents. But Democrats are most vulnerable on issues that rank front-and-center with the electorate, the economy, economic mobility, and healthcare. As I've reported many times, analysts don't expect much change in the House of Representatives, and in fact Democrats have little chance of retaking the chamber in the fall. But as I've said, it's the Senate where the real action is, and some experts suggest the Democrats could be looking at losses of close to 10 seats (the GOP needs 6 seats to capture the majority). I don't see anything at this poll that's likely to dislodge those expectations, and certainly vulnerable incumbents like Kay Hagan are literally running away from questions on the Democrats' once-marquee issue, ObamaCare. See United Liberty, "NC Senate: Kay Hagan runs away from reporters asking about Obamacare."

RELATED: My ideologically-addled antagonist Martin Longman, of BooMan Tribune, is having illusions of Democrat victory in November, "Curtis Gans Says the Dems Can Win in November." Gans (cited there) is a progressive political analyst who's got an interesting (if deeply flawed) piece up at the far-left Washington Monthly, "Midterm Signals and Noise: Why Democrats Could Do Better in November Than Everyone Thinks." After his discussion of the "signals and noise," here's what Gans says on the Democrats' surprisingly (fantastically) good chances for the fall:

Despite current conventional wisdom, such an election [Democrat wave election] is not only possible but probable, but only if three signals occur - if September polls, the polls taken when people are paying attention to the upcoming election, show a substantial improvement in Obama’s approval rating and an equally substantial increase in public support of the Affordable Care Act, and if the economy does not relapse into recession.

Gans has been smoking double-dipped Thai sticks until they're coming out his ears. None of these three things is going to happen. There is no miracle that will lift Obama's public opinion numbers into the plus-50 range (an approval level he'd need to change voters' electoral behavior). He may get back into the high-forties, but for him to gain majority approval again, we'd need robust economic growth with a substantial drop in the unemployment rate, which isn't likely. (It doesn't matter if the economy has a "relapse back into recession," since voters are already angry about the economy right now. They'll only be further enraged should the unemployment rate head north once again --- which is not a foregone conclusion considering Obama's record of economic mismanagement). And while the opinion trends on ObamaCare have probably bottomed out, recall, as Megan McArdle has pointed out, even worse news on the law's mangled roll-out may be yet to come.

Those are the key factors I'm expecting to influence the November results. All the rest is noise, hilariously so in the context of the predictive model of Curtis Gans, and apparently Martin Longman as well.

The Democrats are going to get hammered. I can't see any realistic scenario in which the factors highlighted at the Times poll, or those "three signals" cited by Gans, show a dramatic and politically significant turnaround. If it's going to be a "wave election," it's going to be a GOP wave. Screw the leftist bastards. Democrats rammed the ObamaCare monstrosity down the throats of the American public on a straight party-line vote. Now all they can do is lie about how the Republicans are exploiting ObamaCare "insurance losers" and inventing ObamaCare "horror stories."

It's not going to be pretty, but I'll have more later, as always.

Canadian Woman Gets Smacked in Face by Whale's Tail

You gotta love it. Apparently she was unhurt.

At BuzzFeed, "Watch a Girl Get Smacked In the Face By a Whale."



Also at CBC, "Hamilton woman gets slapped by a whale."

Emily Ratajkowski Sports Illustrated Body Paint 2014

Click around at the link to view Ms. Emily's SI photographs. She's lovely.

There's voting too, for Sports Illustrated's swimsuit "rookie of the year."

Religious-Freedom Bills Proliferate in Statehouses

Well, Jan Brewer couldn't take the heat, but a lot of these bills are being signed into law and will ultimately wind up in court for adjudication.

At the Wall Street Journal:

Arizona has become a major flashpoint in the national debate over the boundaries between religious freedom and discrimination, as legislators there push to enact a new law that would allow business owners to deny service to customers for religious reasons.

But the state is hardly alone in mulling more explicit protections for religious business owners and individuals, whose objections to same-sex marriage have come into increasing conflict with newer laws expanding the rights of gays and lesbians.

Here’s a roundup of various religious-liberty measures circulating in other statehouses. Most have yet to pass a single chamber and a number have been tabled. Some deal specifically with the rights of businesses or students, while others are more broadly worded. In at least two states, the issue may go before voters as a ballot initiative...

Keep reading.

And see TPNN, "Several Other States Follow AZ’s Lead, Propose Religious Rights Legislation."

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer Vetoes Controversial Religious Freedom Law SB 1062

At the Arizona Republic, "BREAKING: Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoes Senate Bill 1062."

This morning's Los Angeles Times has a great piece on the enormous political backlash over the bill, which was obviously much too great for Brewer to withstand, "On gay issue, Arizona may heed national outcry this time":

TUCSON — When Arizona took controversial stands in the past — refusing to create a Martin Luther King Jr. holiday and enacting a tough anti-illegal immigration law — state leaders shrugged off the criticism from out of state as the meddling of outsiders.

But now, after the Legislature passed a measure to bolster the rights of business owners to refuse service to gays and others on the basis of religion, Arizona leaders seem to be listening to a national outcry and are urging the governor to veto the bill.
So what's different this time?

Political insiders and observers say the change can be attributed to a number of forces at work: a growing acceptance of gay rights sweeping the nation, the power of social media and an economic backlash unleashed by the passage of the anti-illegal immigration law that is still fresh in the minds of those in the business community.

Republican Gov. Jan Brewer has said she has not made a decision on the bill, SB 1062, which the GOP-dominated Legislature approved last week. But some of her longtime advisors have said they believe she will veto the measure because of the negative reaction to the bill inside and outside the state.

Barrett Marson, who heads a public relations outfit in Phoenix, recalled that an uproar arose against Arizona in the 1990s when voters rejected a referendum to create a Martin Luther King Jr. holiday. But there is a significant difference between then and now.

"That was pre-Internet," Marson said.

Much of the outrage about SB 1062 spread via social media, especially Twitter. Republican leaders, such as former presidential candidate Mitt Romney and Arizona's U.S. senators, John McCain and Jeff Flake, have taken to Twitter to urge Brewer to veto the bill.

They have joined a loud chorus on social media — including celebrities such as Judd Apatow as well as Arizona business owners and residents — that has tweeted against the measure.

The tweets opposing the legislation are so numerous they have overshadowed the few who have taken to Twitter in support of the bill. Proponents say the measure is not discriminatory but intended to protect religious freedom. "Would you force a Muslim butcher to slaughter pigs b/c you want bacon?" read one tweet.

Arizona also became a target of criticism after Brewer signed the anti-illegal immigration measure, SB 1070, into law in 2010. But the outcry then wasn't as  great as the current controversy, partly because the immigrant rights lobby wasn't as powerful as today's gay community and its supporters, Marson said.

"Certainly there was a short-term economic hit from 1070 … but there aren't many illegal immigrants who are CEOs or management of Fortune 500 companies," he said.

The "economic hit" Marson referred to was boycotts of Arizona businesses following SB 1070. Shortly after SB 1062's passage last week, businesses and companies took to the Internet, saying they still welcomed gay, lesbian and transgender customers.

Marriott, American Airlines and Apple are among the companies and businesses that have come out against the bill.

Some of the same foes of the legislation have threatened to boycott Arizona if the bill becomes law, and that possibility worries these businesses — some remembering the sting of the SB 1070 boycotts.

More at Memeorandum.

'The vast majority of uninsured Americans do not know they must sign up for health insurance by March 31 or pay a fine, according to a new poll...'

That would be the Kaiser Family Foundation "Health Tracking Poll" for February 2014, blogged at Jammie Wearing Fools, "Kaiser Poll: 76% of Uninsured Unaware of ObamaCare Sign-Up Deadline."

Click through for the survey, aggregated at Memeorandum. Among the findings:

While most Americans (54 percent) continue to say they haven’t been impacted by the law one way or another, the share saying they’ve been negatively affected has inched up in recent months (29 percent in February, up from 23 percent last October) and continues to outpace the share saying they’ve personally benefited from the law (17 percent)....

When it comes to next steps on the law, a majority say it should be kept in place, including 48 percent who want Congress to work to improve it and 8 percent who say it should be kept as is. Fewer say Congress should repeal the law and replace it with a Republican-sponsored alternative (12 percent) or repeal it and not replace it (19 percent). Like opinions on the law overall, views about next steps are deeply divided by political party identification, with most Democrats preferring to keep the law in place and a majority of Republicans wanting to see it repealed. Among independents, more than half want Congress to keep the law as is or work to improve it, while a third prefer to see it repealed.

Keep reading.

The main takeaway for me is the enormous uncertainty that still surrounds this legislation. Opinion on ObamaCare is still very much in flux, and it's especially interesting that the majority have no personal experience with the law, which means as more costs are spread around, and quality of care deteriorates as people are shuffled into those narrow-networks (which people oppose), support is likely to decline. Also especially interesting is the number of those uninsured who oppose the law. Young Americans are especially unhappy about ObamaCare. Indeed, the Harvard Institute of Politics poll last December saw younger Millennials jonesing to recall President Obama from office (although we can't do that through the ballot box).

In any case, political campaigns have a way of shaping public opinion on the issues and it's obvious that most Democrats running for reelection would rather not talk about ObamaCare. So, overall the ball's in the GOP's court. The public's not all that big on ObamaCare repeal. But key demographics don't like it and thus overall numbers could shift in the GOP's direction as implementation proceeds (disastrously).

Very fluid all around --- and you gotta love the level of ignorance on the individual mandate! We'll be getting a lot more horror stories throughout the year on the tax penalties, although the hilarious big meme among idiot Democrats claims that Republicans are pushing "fake" horror stories for the November run-up. Progressives, heh. They're so stupid it almost hurts, lol.

Mercedes-Benz to Base Its Regional Office in Long Beach

I saw this in the news rack for the Long Beach Register while out to lunch the other day, and now here it is at the parent newspaper, the O.C. Register:

Since Mercedes-Benz USA announced plans to lease a 1.1 million-square foot Boeing plane factory in July, the luxury automaker has kept its plans for the former Long Beach facility a tightly guarded secret.

But an executive with Irvine-based Sares-Regis Group, which is the landlord for the 52.2 acres at 4501 E. Conant St., said that Mercedes-Benz plans to use the facility as its vehicle preparation facility and regional office for the western United States, and as a training center.

With the exception of the main airplane hangar, the fenced-in plant has been mostly turned into a huge parking lot with fresh concrete laid along Conant.

Larry Lukanish, a senior vice president with Sares-Regis, also says Mercedes-Benz will test, inspect, customize and prepare new cars for transfer to dealerships.

Sares-Regis, which bought the property in July 2012, plans to turn the property over to Mercedes-Benz USA on March 1 to begin a 15-year lease, Lukanish said.

Chicago-based Boeing Co. shuttered the facilities at the corner of Conant and Lakewood Boulevard in 2006, when the last 717 commercial jet rolled off the line. Boeing inherited the plane when it acquired McDonnell Douglas Corp. in 1997. The plane was originally called the MD-95 but never caught on with major airlines. The hangar is still on the property, which has a large “Fly DC Jets” sign on top. The factory, which employed thousands for decades, once built some of the world's most popular airlines, including the DC-3, DC-8 and MD-80.

Several outbuildings were demolished and tunnels under Lakewood Boulevard were filled, Lukanish said. The hangar interiors remain unchanged with the exception of painting, removal of old cranes and a mezzanine structure.

Mariella Kapsaskis, a spokeswoman with Mercedes-Benz USA's corporate headquarters in Montvale, N.J., confirmed portions of Lukanish's disclosure. She said in a statement that the car manufacturer would be consolidating its Western regional offices, its training and performance center and vehicle preparation center under a single roof in Long Beach as a means of improving overall efficiency. This includes its regional office in Irvine and its vehicle preparation center in Carson.

She couldn't comment on whether those two offices would be closed or how many employees would be affected.

Beyond California, the other regional offices are located in Jacksonville, Fla.; Parsippany, N.J.; and Rosemont, Ill.

Well, I drive by the facility everday, which is right next to my campus. I've been meaning to take some pictures but I just never stop and make the time. (Besides, it's been a demolition site mostly, since part of the facility included an old hanger that was torn down to make way for the huge concrete lot they've created on the grounds.) It'll be opening soon though, so I'll update when I get the chance to take some pics.

More here.

RELATED: From last summer at LAT, "Mercedes-Benz leases old Boeing jet factory in Long Beach."

Bitcoin Virtual Currency Market Crashes

Funniest thing, but a student on Monday said that he'd invested in Bitcoin. I forgot exactly how this came up during discussion. Mostly we were talking about state sovereignty and one of my students got on the topic of a "cashless economy," and then the young guy in the back started in with Bitcoin. We talked about it for five minutes or so, heh.

And then here comes the news from yesterday morning, "Shutdown of Mt. Gox Rattles Bitcoin Market: Closure Raises Concern About the Future of Unregulated Virtual Currency."

And at LAT, "Bitcoin virtual currency is on the verge of collapse":

It was supposed to revolutionize the global monetary system. Instead, the bitcoin virtual currency that has captured the imagination of investors and financiers is on the verge of collapse.

In a stunning blow to a novel way to buy products and services, the world's largest exchange for trading bitcoin currency shut down Tuesday, triggering a massive sell-off and sending many prospective investors away — perhaps for good.

"This is extremely destructive," said Mark Williams, a risk-management expert and former Federal Reserve Bank examiner. "What we're seeing is a lot of the flaws. It's not only fragile, it's fragile as eggshells."

The mysterious circumstances that triggered the failure of the exchange, Mt. Gox in Tokyo, is only adding to the renewed anxiety over the virtual currency, which just a month earlier had been gaining momentum and supporters.

After saying users could not withdraw their funds, Mt. Gox suddenly ceased all operations, including shutting down its website. Mt. Gox users may have lost more than $300 million worth of bitcoins in what was the latest and biggest in a series of recent setbacks for the virtual currency.

The currency exists only online, and its value is based on an algorithm. Investors buy bitcoins with dollars, euros and other real currency. A purchase with bitcoins typically involves transferring an amount from the buyer's bitcoin "digital wallet" to the seller's wallet on the Internet.

The blow to bitcoin's credibility has highlighted all the fears critics have been trying to raise. Because it is unregulated and anonymous, there is probably no way for users to know who may have seized the thousands of missing bitcoins — and no way to recover them.

This sudden reversal of fortune is particularly painful for enthusiasts who believed just a few weeks ago that bitcoin was on the cusp of mainstream acceptance because of growing support from venture capitalists, banks and regulators.

Instead of triumph, the bitcoin community is now focused on repairing the damage. Mt. Gox is nothing more than a "collapsed tower of toxic sludge," said Williams, who is also a finance professor at Boston University School of Management...

Well, I described Bitcoin as a "fad" on Monday, and that might be the perfect word for it in the end.

Still more here.