Jonathan Gruber's 'Stupid' Budget Tricks

The totalitarian progs are all, "Nothing to see here. Move along!"

But see WSJ, "His ObamaCare candor shows how Congress routinely cons taxpayers":

#GruberGate basically: a) Exposed Obama as a liar b) Gave the supreme court the underpinnings to gut #Obamacare in the spring.

— RockPrincess (@Rockprincess818) November 16, 2014

As a rule, Americans don’t like to be called “stupid,” as Jonathan Gruber is discovering. Whatever his academic contempt for voters, the ObamaCare architect and Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist deserves the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his candor about the corruption of the federal budget process.

In his now-infamous talk at the University of Pennsylvania last year, Professor Gruber argued that the Affordable Care Act “would not have passed” had Democrats been honest about the income-redistribution policies embedded in its insurance regulations. But the more instructive moment is his admission that “this bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies.”

Mr. Gruber means the Congressional Budget Office, the institution responsible for putting “scores” or official price tags on legislation. He’s right that to pass ObamaCare Democrats perpetrated the rawest, most cynical abuse of the CBO since its creation in 1974.

In another clip from Mr. Gruber’s seemingly infinite video library, he discusses how he and Democrats wrote the law to game the CBO’s fiscal conventions and achieve goals that would otherwise be “politically impossible.” In still another, he explains that these ruses are “a sad statement about budget politics in the U.S., but there you have it.”

Yes you do. Such admissions aren’t revelations, since the truth has long been obvious to anyone curious enough to look. We and other critics wrote about ObamaCare’s budget gimmicks during the debate, and Rep. Paul Ryan exposed them at the 2010 “health summit.” President Obama changed the subject.

But rarely are liberal intellectuals as full frontal as Mr. Gruber about the accounting fraud ingrained in ObamaCare. Also notable are his do-what-you-gotta-do apologetics: “I’d rather have this law than not,” he says.

Recall five years ago. The White House wanted to pretend that the open-ended new entitlement would spend less than $1 trillion over 10 years and reduce the deficit too. Congress requires the budget gnomes to score bills as written, no matter how unrealistic the assumption or fake the promise. Democrats with the help of Mr. Gruber carefully designed the bill to exploit this built-in gullibility.

So they used a decade of taxes to fund merely six years of insurance subsidies. They made-believe that Medicare payments to hospitals will some day fall below Medicaid rates. A since-repealed program for long-term care front-loaded taxes but back-loaded spending, meant to gradually go broke by design. Remember the spectacle of Democrats waiting for the white smoke to come up from CBO and deliver the holy scripture verdict?

On the tape, Mr. Gruber also identifies a special liberal manipulation: CBO’s policy reversal to not count the individual mandate to buy insurance as an explicit component of the federal budget. In 1994, then CBO chief Robert Reischauer reasonably determined that if the government forces people to buy a product by law, then those transactions no longer belong to the private economy but to the U.S. balance sheet. The CBO’s face-melting cost estimate helped to kill HillaryCare.

The CBO director responsible for this switcheroo that moved much of ObamaCare’s real spending off the books was Peter Orszag, who went on to become Mr. Obama’s budget director. Mr. Orszag nonetheless assailed CBO during the debate for not giving him enough credit for the law’s phantom “savings.”

Then again, Mr. Gruber told a Holy Cross audience in 2010 that although ObamaCare “is 90% health insurance coverage and 10% about cost control, all you ever hear people talk about is cost control. How it’s going to lower the cost of health care, that’s all they talk about. Why? Because that’s what people want to hear about because a majority of Americans care about health-care costs.”

More.

And see Gateway Pundit, "BOOM! Gruber White House Meeting Included CBO Director, Robert Gibbs, Axelrod and Barack Obama."

BONUS: "#ObamaCare Architect Exposes Progressive Totalitarianism — And Repsac's Too!"

Teens and Young Adults Don't Want to Work

My first response to seeing this polling data is that it's simply incomprehensible. But then, thinking about it for a minute, there are all kinds of variables that would contribute to a decreasing desire to work among young (and very young Americans). Either way, this is a terrible development for American society.

At Pew Research, "More and more Americans are outside the labor force entirely. Who are they?":

But let’s look in particular at the youngest part of the eligible workforce. The share of 16- to 24-year-olds saying they didn’t want a job rose from an average 29.5% in 2000 to an average 39.4% over the first 10 months of this year. There was a much smaller increase among prime working-age adults (ages 25 to 54) over that period. And among people aged 55 and up, the share saying they didn’t want a job actually fell, to an average 58.2% this year.

'This isn’t gender neutrality, this is women upset that men can stand and pee...'

"This is going to turn me into an activist."

 Heh, at iOTW REPORT, "Leftist Idiocy – Retrofitted Gender Neutral Bathrooms Are Blocking the Urinals With Tape."

Big Cat on the Loose in Paris

Apparently, it's not a tiger. But still.

At Telegraph UK:

Soldiers called in to help hunt for the Disneyland Paris "tiger", with fresh paw prints spotted after beast apparently crossed a major highway and slinked past a petrol station.

Police and soldiers hunting for a large cat believed to be on the loose near Paris have shut down a motorway service station after the beast was spotted there a day after it was first seen near the Disneyland theme park.

Motorists were warned to be extra vigilant on the busy A4 motorway after a driver first spotted what he described as a “wandering animal” before dawn on Friday at the service station.

Paw prints believed were later found on the grounds of the service station.

However, the National Office for Hunting and Wildlife said it is not a tiger but some other sort of (as yet unidentified) feline. They base their statement on analysis of its paw prints.

More at London's Daily Mail, "Camera footage captures big cat stalking across a car park near Disneyland as police marksmen continue hunt for 'aggressive and adventurous animal'."

U.S. Fuel Costs Drop to Historic Lows, Thanks to Shale Oil Boom — And No Thanks to Obama!

According to the Los Angeles Times, increased U.S. energy production, resulting from the shale boom, is forcing a structural change in U.S. energy markets, that --- along with decreased demand --- could result in a long-term decline in fuel costs.

And keep in mind, consumers and business owners have more disposable income with lower energy costs, which in turn boosts spending in other areas, like recreation and job hiring. (Oh, and of course the federal and state governments would raise much more in tax revenues from higher business earnings and job growth, which would reduce pressure to raise taxes --- but don't expect idiot progs to be touting these benefits any time soon).

In sum, a policy focus on expanding the U.S. energy sector would be a huge boom for Americans across the board. Instead, President "I'll Bankrupt the Coal Industry" Obama is looking to crush the energy sector in favor of a climate change legacy for his administration.

Americans opened their eyes to this abuse on November 4th, and if the Dems don't change their ways, they'll be looking at another ass-kicking in 2016.

In any case, see the Los Angeles Times, "Gasoline prices continue to drop":

How low can gas prices go?

In Southern California — and across the country — prices have been dropping for months, placing extra dollars in consumers' wallets. This week the average price for a gallon of regular hit $3.24 in Los Angeles and Long Beach, the lowest in four years, according to AAA. In Orange County, it was $3.19.

Energy analysts say it may go lower.

"We could see gasoline prices in the high 2s," said Amy Myers Jaffe, executive director of energy and sustainability at UC Davis.

Several factors are likely to get prices there, Jaffe said.

Oil production in the United States — driven by the nation's shale oil boom — is increasing. And on the demand side, the sluggish global economy has sent the price of crude steadily down.

In the U.S., where growth has been stronger, demographics and consumer habits are putting downward pressure on demand, analysts said...

The current decline is partly seasonal...

But the nation's shale oil boom should help drive down prices in 2015 across the state, with average prices potentially falling below $3 once next year's summer driving season ends, Kloza said.

"It's going to be a sloppy year next year for oil," he said. "On balance, crude oil prices should be the lowest they've been in four or five years."

The rise in oil production has been so great that the U.S. Energy Information Administration now predicts average daily production in 2015 will reach the highest level since 1972.

Low fuel prices have been a boon to consumers' pocket books, especially working- and middle-class Americans for whom gas accounts for a significant portion of their paychecks.

When prices were around $4 a gallon, Rita Mena paid as much as $80 to fill her Ford Explorer.

On Friday, at an Arco gas station in Boyle Heights, she shelled out $60.

With the extra money, the 32-year-old said, she can buy more of the things she needs, like groceries or diapers for her 2 1/2-year-old daughter, Leilani.

Then there's the luxuries.

"I want to go out more now," said Mena, who works at a downtown L.A. health clinic. "And maybe I could pick up an extra present or something for Christmas."

PREVIOUSLY: "The Geopolitical Consequences of the Shale Revolution."

ICYMI: John Nagl, Knife Fights

Get your copy at Amazon, Knife Fights: A Memoir of Modern War in Theory and Practice.

Francoise Boufhal #Rule5

A real sweetie, via Twitter:

Francoise Boufhal @Onlybadchicks @S2nningBabes @johnnywalkeryyc @Fan_Of_Glamour @US_GlamourFan @onlyhotgirlzz #beauty pic.twitter.com/zWrZaSH7lE

— BABEIMPACT (@babeimpact) October 14, 2014

More on Donald Sutherland

He's a bleedin' lefty, but I think he's onto something about the "youth revolution."

More from Gentleman's Quarterly:

Donald Sutherland's epic Hollywood life and career. The GQ &A: http://t.co/5bku2tjkWH pic.twitter.com/MzIjMqHd7D

— GQ Magazine (@GQMagazine) November 15, 2014

Air-Sand Battle: Force Size, Land-Air-Sea Balance, and the Fight Against #ISIS

I love this piece.

From Kate Brannen, at Foreign Policy, "The fight against the Islamic State is forcing the Pentagon to rethink its plans for the future of warfare":

The  fight against the self-proclaimed Islamic State is still in its early days, but already it is challenging the Pentagon's assumptions about where and how war will be fought and what the military will need to be prepared.

The conflict in Iraq and Syria represents the type of war the Obama administration has tried to relegate to history. The days of fighting protracted ground wars in the Middle East were supposed to be over. Instead, the White House directed the Pentagon to turn its attention to the Asia-Pacific region, where it's believed by some that high-tech weapons systems belonging to the Air Force and Navy could be optimized in a more conventional fight.

But with new conflicts and pockets of violence and instability rapidly cropping up in places such as Ukraine, the Middle East, and parts of Africa, defense policymakers are being forced to revisit, if not rethink, some of the assumptions that underpin today's strategy and resource decisions.

Among the ideas under scrutiny are the relevance of ground forces and whether state actors pose the most dangerous threat to the U.S. homeland and global security.

For the military services, the debate over these assumptions will directly affect their size, budget, and the types of weapons they buy.

For senior military leaders, the issue of the Islamic State, also known as ISIS and ISIL, "is as much about where the services are headed as it is about the problem to solve," said David E. Johnson, a military analyst at Rand who from 2012 to 2014 directed the Army's Strategic Studies Group for Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno.

The Pentagon has laid out a strategy that accepts greater risk in the ground forces so that more resources can be poured into the Air Force and Navy -- the services that play the biggest role in the Asia-Pacific region. A smaller ground force is also believed to be necessary due to escalating personnel costs at a time when the defense budget is shrinking.

As part of this plan, the Army is continuing to shrink from a wartime high of 570,000 active-duty soldiers to today's 505,000, with the goal of dropping to 490,000 by the end of 2015. And even deeper cuts are likely to come; the Army is expected to downsize to 420,000 soldiers if Congress doesn't undo the automatic budget cuts known as sequestration planned for 2016.

The assumption behind these troop reductions is that the United States won't fight large-scale, protracted ground wars like it has in Iraq and Afghanistan anytime soon. And although no one is recommending inserting large-scale U.S. ground forces into Iraq -- the current cap is 3,100 "non-combat" troops -- events there and in Ukraine are providing the Army support for its argument that it is too risky to make the Army much smaller than it already is.

"I think there is a sense by many in the Army of, 'Hey, we told you you've been engaging in some degree of wishful thinking and we think we're getting growing evidence that we're not talking about hypotheticals,'" said Maren Leed, a senior advisor to Odierno from 2011 to 2012 who is now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "It's ISIS, it's Ebola, it's Russia. Name your problem, ground forces matter."

Meanwhile, the other services are arguing, "You can do it with us and with other people's boots," she said...

More.

PHOTO CREDIT: Wikimedia Commons.

#ObamaCare Architect Exposes Progressive Totalitarianism — And Repsac's Too!

But hey, "Gruber Shmuber," right?

All the leftist lies, deceit, and tyrannical corruption are fine and dandy, as long as it provides a few victims of "capitalist oppression" access to ObamaCare!

Newly Insured Through Exchanges Give Coverage Good Marks http://t.co/tMazy4D6zs / Gruber Shmuber. THIS is what matters.

— Walter James Casper (@repsac3) November 14, 2014

Well, maybe not.

See Bruce Thornton, at FrontPage Magazine:

Professor Jonathan Gruber of MIT, who designed the Affordable Care Act, used to be the symbol of the Democrats’ technocratic bona fides, and an example of how big government with its “scientific” experts can solve social and economic problems from health care to a warming planet. Yet a recently publicized video of remarks he made at a panel in 2013, along with 2 other videos in the same vein, has now made him the poster child of the elitist progressives’ contempt for the American people, and their sacrifice of prudence and reason to raw political power.

In the video Gruber explains the spin and lies the Dems used to give cover to their Congressmen so they could vote for Obamacare. Especially important was avoiding the “t-word.” So, Gruber crows on the video, “This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure [the Congressional Budget Office] did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies.” He also explained how the bills’ writers covered up the obvious redistributionist core of the legislation, which to work has to take money from the healthy young to pay for health care for the sick and old. “If you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in — you made explicit healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed.”

Then this handsomely paid consultant to the “most transparent administration in history” revealed the foundational contempt progressives have for the “people” whose champions they claim to be: “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass.” As David Horowitz tweeted, “Progressive totalitarianism: We know what’s good for you and will lie, cheat and then compel you to agree with us.”

This modern version of the Platonic “guardians,” who possess superior knowledge but who must camouflage their tyrannical rule with lies, is now over 100 years old, and has become deeply embedded in our politics. It was the fundamental assumption of American Progressivism, which argued that modern technology and social change had rendered the old constitutional order a dangerous relic....

The politics of today’s progressives all have their roots in the old Progressive assumptions––that enlightened elites know better than the people what is good for them, and that the people, being such unenlightened clods, need to be manipulated and lied to for their own good. Most important, the freedom and autonomy of the people must be limited by intrusive federal agencies and regulations in order for these utopian goals to be achieved.

Or to put it in other terms, this set of progressive beliefs––which we have seen acted on for the last six years by the president and practically every government agency––is totalitarian at its core. Not the brutal despotism of Italian fascism or Soviet communism or German Nazism, but Tocqueville’s “soft despotism,” the kinder, gentler Leviathan which undermines self-reliance and self-government by taking responsibility for the people’s comfort and happiness, and financing its largess by the redistribution of property. But no matter how comfortable in the short-term, such a condition is nothing other than servitude. And as Tocqueville warns, “No one will ever believe that a liberal, wise, and energetic government can spring from the suffrages of a subservient people.”

Repsac's a fascist asshole, so it's easy to see why he's all "Gruber Shmuber" at this outlandish revelation of the massive Obama-Democrat lies, hypocrisy, and jack-boot authoritarianism. It's what he's all about.

Climate Change Made Simple

From Stephen Green, at Pajamas Media:

If we’re just going to jack up energy prices to make ourselves feel good in the name of “doing something,” fuggidaboudit. Cheap energy promotes production, it promotes trade, it promotes mobility — three of the keys to American prosperity. Any permanent “skyrocketing” of energy prices would condemn millions, perhaps billions of people to lives of continued poverty. Or condemn them to death.

Assuming we can safely determine that the coming climate change would be bad for us, we then move on to the question of how and why the change is coming. Is it due to sun cycles? Carbon emissions? Hyperintelligent Wampa terraformers from ice planet Hoth? Some combination of factors? This is a vital question, and the models only provide answers based on the untested assumptions of the programers.

But let us now assume that we know bad change is a-comin’ and that we know what’s causing it. Now we have to do something, right? Not so fast there, pardner. If it turns out carbon emissions are actually helping keep things warmer and better than they otherwise would be, it would be a mistake to play into the Hothians icy hands by reducing those emissions. But until we know, we don’t know. Ignorance is neither bliss nor a basis for swift action...

More.

Dr. Matt Taylor and the Absurdity of Modern Feminism

If by chance you haven't seen the mewling, bawling apology, it's here, "Rosetta comet scientist D.r Matt Taylor apologises for shirt."

Now, at Twitchy, "‘Slutshirt shamed’! ‘Feminist bullies’ just made a comet scientist cry over his ‘sexist’ shirt."

http://t.co/SjaYHf54zY feminist bullies have made the guy who landed a spacecraft on comet cry and apologise for a harmless shirt

— Milo Yiannopoulos (@Nero) November 14, 2014

And here's Glenn Reynolds' response, "1 small shirt for a man, 1 giant leap backward for women."

And that's followed by Ann Althouse's fisking, "Did feminists make the comet landing all about clothes?"

Yes, society's pretty much all f-ked up.

As Global Strategic Threats Intensify, U.S. Nuclear Arsenal at Risk of Becoming Anachronism

A lot of problems with the U.S. strategic nuclear force.

At LAT, "Major overhaul of nuclear force planned to improve security and morale."

And also, "As U.S. nuclear arsenal ages, other nations have modernized":

As Russian forces were drawing back from a swift and violent incursion into Ukraine this fall, Moscow was delivering another powerful military statement many miles to the north.

A new 40-foot Bulava intercontinental ballistic missile, capable of delivering an unparalleled 10 nuclear warheads, was launched by a Russian navy submarine on a test run over the icy White Sea. The weapon was a clear signal to the world that as Russia battles tightening economic sanctions intended to block Moscow's aggressive posturing on NATO's frontiers, President Vladimir Putin has another card to play.

"I want to remind you that Russia is one of the most powerful nuclear nations," Putin declared earlier this year at a state-sponsored youth camp. He reinforced the message last month, inviting the world to "remember what consequences discord between major nuclear powers could bring for strategic stability."

The debate over how to modernize America's aging nuclear forces has taken on increasing urgency with the emergence of a newly assertive Russia and a new generation of nuclear powers with increasing technological sophistication.

North Korea, Pakistan and India all are working quickly to improve their nuclear arsenals and delivery systems. By next year, China is expected to be capable of delivering a nuclear strike anywhere in the continental U.S. for the first time in its history — a threat that Russia has posed for decades.

While the nuclear confrontation between the United States and Russia cooled off after the 1991 fall of the Soviet Union, it has never ended. Indeed, the long-held hope for continual reductions in nuclear forces now seems unattainable, nuclear arms analysts say. For the first time in years, the U.S. and Russia each have increased the number of nuclear warheads deployed over the latest six-month monitoring period — the U.S. by 57 additional weapons and Russia by 131.

Russia is spending $560 billion on military modernization over the next six years with 25% allocated to aging nuclear forces, part of a program to replace all of its Soviet Union-era launchers. U.S. officials say it will take at least $355 billion over the coming decade to upgrade America's nuclear arsenal and keep up with the rearmament spree underway in the rest of the world.

"Our rival powers are investing billions of dollars to modernize and improve their nuclear systems," said Maj. Gen. Sandra Finan, Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center commander, warning that if the U.S. is "to remain credible," it must maintain nuclear preparedness as a priority.

But veterans of the Cold War also say tit-for-tat responses in nuclear confrontation carry grave risks, anchored to erroneous assumptions that a nuclear exchange would leave one side in better condition than the other.

"God help us if we ever need them," said Philip Coyle, a former nuclear weapons scientist, director of nuclear testing, senior Pentagon official and national security adviser.

The U.S. and Russia both continue to field land-based missiles that could be launched in a few minutes, submarine-based missiles able to deliver a devastating counterpunch to any surprise attack, and bombers that could loiter in threatening holding patterns above the Arctic.

A new strategic arms reduction treaty signed in 2010 limits deployed strategic warheads to 1,550 on each side, with a cap of 700 missiles and bombers by 2018. And over the last two decades, nuclear capabilities have been far from the U.S. military's top priority. Most of the attention has gone to high-tech conventional weapons that evolved after the first Gulf War. Two decades have gone by without developing a nuclear strategic weapon.

All the while, U.S. nuclear-capable bombers, submarines, intercontinental ballistic missiles and their launch-control bunkers have been allowed to become virtual Cold War museums.

A fascinating piece.

Continue reading.

ZOO's Favorites

At Zoo Today, "ZOO's favourite babes in a boob-packed compilation video!"

Obama's Executive Amnesty Threatens Constitutional Crisis

If Obama goes for the full 5-million legalization plan, there's going to be hell to pay.

Here's Fox News, "Source: Obama to announce 10-point immigration plan via exec action as early as next week."

Also at LAT, "Going solo on immigration: Obama weighs reform options."

And here's Megyn Kelly's full opening segment last night, which includes comments from Professor Jonathan Turley, who has repeatedly warned against Obama's authoritarian executive actions.

After Shellacking, Democrats Shifting to 'McGovern Model' for 2016

I expect regressive Democrats to increasingly rally around Senator Elizabeth Warren over the next couple of years, pulling the party further to the left. And whether or not "Fauxcahontas" runs in 2016, the Dems are positioning themselves the way George McGovern did heading into the 1972 presidential election: as an ideologically extreme party out of touch with Main Street economic concerns. As such, the Republicans could deliver a massive thumping to the Democrats next time around, perhaps not as dramatic as the one Richard Nixon delivered to McGovern, but certainly for the same reasons. The Democrats will be split between ideological purists and political pragmatists, and the wisdom of the latter won't become evident until a couple election cycles of far-left repudiation by the voters.

An any case, here's the NYT, "After Losses, Liberal and Centrist Democrats Square Off on Strategy."

Arrogance Plus Deception = #ObamaCare.

At the Chicago Tribune, "Arrogance plus deception equals Obamacare. Ask Gruber."

The Loneliest President Since Nixon

From Peggy Noonan, at WSJ, "Facing adversity, Obama has no idea how to respond":

Seven years ago I was talking to a longtime Democratic operative on Capitol Hill about a politician who was in trouble. The pol was likely finished, he said. I was surprised. Can’t he change things and dig himself out? No. “People do what they know how to do.” Politicians don’t have a vast repertoire. When they get in a jam they just do what they’ve always done, even if it’s not working anymore.

Seven years ago I was talking to a longtime Democratic operative on Capitol Hill about a politician who was in trouble. The pol was likely finished, he said. I was surprised. Can’t he change things and dig himself out? No. “People do what they know how to do.” Politicians don’t have a vast repertoire. When they get in a jam they just do what they’ve always done, even if it’s not working anymore.

This came to mind when contemplating President Obama. After a devastating election, he is presenting himself as if he won. The people were not saying no to his policies, he explained, they would in fact like it if Republicans do what he tells them.

You don’t begin a new relationship with a threat, but that is what he gave Congress: Get me an immigration bill I like or I’ll change U.S. immigration law on my own.

Mr. Obama is doing what he knows how to do—stare them down and face them off. But his circumstances have changed. He used to be a conquering hero, now he’s not. On the other hand he used to have to worry about public support. Now, with no more elections before him, he has the special power of the man who doesn’t care.

I have never seen a president in exactly the position Mr. Obama is, which is essentially alone. He’s got no one with him now. The Republicans don’t like him, for reasons both usual and particular: They have had no good experiences with him. The Democrats don’t like him, for their own reasons plus the election loss. Before his post-election lunch with congressional leaders, he told the press that he will judiciously consider any legislation, whoever sends it to him, Republicans or Democrats. His words implied that in this he was less partisan and more public-spirited than the hacks arrayed around him. It is for these grace notes that he is loved. No one at the table looked at him with colder, beadier eyes than outgoing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid , who clearly doesn’t like him at all. The press doesn’t especially like the president; in conversation they evince no residual warmth. This week at the Beijing summit there was no sign the leaders of the world had any particular regard for him. They can read election returns. They respect power and see it leaking out of him. If Mr. Obama had won the election they would have faked respect and affection.

Vladimir Putin delivered the unkindest cut, patting Mr. Obama’s shoulder reassuringly. Normally that’s Mr. Obama’s move, putting his hand on your back or shoulder as if to bestow gracious encouragement, needy little shrimp that you are. It’s a dominance move. He’s been doing it six years. This time it was Mr. Putin doing it to him. The president didn’t like it

From Reuters: “‘It’s beautiful, isn’t it?’ Putin was overheard saying in English in Obama’s general direction, referring to the ornate conference room. ‘Yes,’ Obama replied, coldly, according to journalists who witnessed the scene.”

The last time we saw a president so alone it was Richard Nixon, at the end of his presidency, when the Democrats had turned on him, the press hated him, and the Republicans were fleeing. It was Sen. Barry Goldwater, the GOP’s standard-bearer in 1964, and House Minority Leader John Rhodes, also of Arizona, who went to the White House to tell Nixon his support in Congress had collapsed, they would vote to impeach. Years later Goldwater called Nixon “The world’s biggest liar.”

Obama's a petulant bitch --- and a freakin' national disgrace.

More.

New RNC Video Hammers Democrats Over Jonathan Gruber #ObamaCare Comments

The Dems are getting Grubered, heh.

'Jonathan Gruber is One of Most Respected Economist in the World!'

That's the quote from outgoing Senate Majority Dickhead Harry Reid, on the MIT economist suddenly Democrats "have never heard of."

Watch:



And ICYMI, "#ObamaCare Sold on a Pack of Lies."

Keira Knightley's Topless Stunt: Valid Protest or Shameless Self-Promotion?

Everybody's doing topless shoots nowadays. Of course it's promotional. Some folks thought Ms. Knightly was unimpressive in her debut, but beauty's in the eye of the beholder.

In any case, here's Charlotte Allen, at the Los Angeles Times.

And previously, "Keira Knightley for Interview Magazine September 2014."

Donald Sutherland Calls for 'Revolution' Among American Youth

I actually agree with Donald Sutherland on this, although I think we differ on the kind of revolution that needs to happen.

At Truth Revolt.

#ObamaCare Sold on a Pack of Lies

I was trying to avoid the whole idiot-gasbag-liar Jonathan Gruber issue (since the fact that lies were used to pass ObamaCare is like so 2009), but if Charles Krauthammer's weighing in ... well, let's just say he's got my vote.

At WaPo, "The Gruber Confession":

Dude RT @jaketapper: Obamacare architect #Gruber in 6th video: 'Mislabeling' helped us get rid of tax breaks http://t.co/DEfjxzAW47

— Amanda Carpenter (@amandacarpenter) November 14, 2014

It’s not exactly the Ems Dispatch (the diplomatic cable Bismarck doctored to provoke the 1870 Franco-Prussian War). But what the just-resurfaced Gruber Confession lacks in world-historical consequence, it makes up for in world-class cynicism. This October 2013 video shows MIT Professor Jonathan Gruber, a principal architect of Obamacare, admitting that, in order to get it passed, the law was made deliberately obscure and deceptive. It constitutes the ultimate vindication of the charge that Obamacare was sold on a pack of lies.

“Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage,” said Gruber. “Basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass.” This was no open-mic gaffe. It was a clear, indeed enthusiastic, admission to an academic conference of the mendacity underlying Obamacare.

First, Gruber said, the bill’s authors manipulated the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which issues gold-standard cost estimates of any legislative proposal: “This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes.” Why? Because “if CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies.” And yet, the president himself openly insisted that the individual mandate — what you must pay the government if you fail to buy health insurance — was not a tax.

Worse was the pretense that Obamacare wouldn’t cost anyone anything. On the contrary, it’s a win-win, insisted President Obama, promising that the “typical family” would save $2,500 on premiums every year.

Skeptics like me pointed out the obvious: You can’t subsidize 30 million uninsured without someone paying something. Indeed, Gruber admits, Obamacare was a huge transfer of wealth — which had to be hidden from the American people, because “if you had a law which . . . made explicit that healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed.”

Remember: The whole premise of Obamacare was that it would help the needy, but if you were not in need, if you liked what you had, you would be left alone. Which is why Obama kept repeating — PolitiFact counted 31 times — that “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan.”

But of course you couldn’t, as millions discovered when they were kicked off their plans last year. Millions more were further shocked when they discovered major hikes in their premiums and deductibles. It was their wealth that was being redistributed.

As NBC News and others reported last year, the administration knew this all along. But White House political hands overrode those wary about the president’s phony promise. In fact, Obama knew the falsity of his claim as far back as February 2010, when, at a meeting with congressional leaders, he agreed that millions would lose their plans.

Now, it’s not unconstitutional to lie. Nor are laws enacted by means of deliberate deception thereby rendered invalid. But it is helpful for citizens to know the cynicism with which the massive federalization of their health care was crafted...

Keep reading.

Femen Crucifix Protest at the Vatican

This is actually one of their more grotesque protests --- and I normally give these women the benefit of the doubt.

At Gateway Pundit, "Topless Femen Activists Simulate Anal Sex With Crucifix at Vatican Protest (Video)."

Also at Deutsche Welle‎, "Femen ladies in leather skirts protest at Vatican - boobs and all":

Bare-chested and wearing leather skirts, members of a women's rights activist group gathered at St. Peter's Square in the Vatican on Friday to … ehm protest. Femen style.

Also at Femen's website, "NO POPE IN THE PARLIAMENT! NO RELIGION IN POLITICS!"

Senior Democrats Slam Congressional Leaders After Party's Epic Thrashing in Midterm Elections

At the Hill, "Dems fault leaders for brushing off losses."

The criticisms are going to fall on deaf (and dumb) ears. With the Obama-Dems it's like a runaway train to far-left extremist oblivion.

Obama Looking to Cement His Legacy, Democrat Party Fortunes Be Damned

Those good old boys at the Old Gray Lady are always good for some pro-Obama framing.

In taking his administration farther to the left, ignoring the lessons of the Democrats' historic midterm shellacking, the president hopes to secure his progressive legacy. Meanwhile, this just opens up the political target on Hillary's back. Well, either Hillary or whichever unlucky Democrat bastard gets to carry the party's standard into 2016.

Americans want jobs, economic growth and rising wages. Instead, Obama's ramming down unlawful executive amnesty, bogus climate change agreements, and Internet "net neutrality." I'm sure that just bursts the cockles of economically stressed Americans across the country.

But hey, The One's smarter than everyone else, and NYT's all jiggy with it. Heh, as if we should be expecting something else.

See, "Obama’s Moves Defying Label of Lame Duck."

Obama's Climate Accord Sets Democrats Up for Failure

Hey, if anyone's a true believer it's The One in the Oval Office.

But Democrat strategist John Podesta is the main brain behind making global warming a Democrat hot-button issue for 2016. Podesta's supposedly going to chair a Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, so he's going to be personally responsible for setting her up at the GOP's whipping girl. And boy, top Republicans are chomping at the bit on this one.

At NYT, "In Climate Deal With China, Obama May Set 2016 Theme."

PREVIOUSLY: "Obama's Green Leap Forward."

Obama's Green Leap Forward

So, yeah, Obama learned nothing from the left's midterm debacle. It's almost like he wants his party to fail in 2016 and beyond.

At WSJ, "Obama trades higher U.S. energy costs now for distant Chinese promises":

Meaningless global warming promises are much easier than corralling weapons of mass destruction in North Korea, or convincing Beijing to fight Islamic State, or for that matter stopping Chinese cyber-attacks on U.S. military and corporate targets. Mr. Xi must have been delighted to see a U.S. President agree to make America less economically competitive in return for rhetorical bows to doing something someday about climate change.

More.

Bill Cassidy Opens Up 16-Point Lead Over Mary Landrieu in #LASen

Oh boy, she's toast.

At the Hill, "Cassidy leads Landrieu in internal poll":

Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) has opened up a 16 point lead over Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) in their Louisiana Senate runoff, according to an internal poll conducted on behalf of the Cassidy campaign and obtained by The Hill.

Cassidy takes 56.6 percent against Landrieu’s 40.5 percent in the poll conducted by Magellan Strategies. While internal polls should be viewed with some skepticism, it’s the first head-to-head poll to be released in the runoff period. The RealClearPolitics average of polls taken before Election Day showed Cassidy up by only 5 percent in the head-to-head matchup.

A source close to the Landrieu campaign strongly pushed back against the poll, arguing that it’s an automated, push-button poll conducted by a conservative outlet, it used loaded terms to survey only issues pertinent to the Cassidy campaign, and that it underestimates Landrieu’s popularity among African American voters.
On Election Day, Landrieu took 43 percent in a field where Republicans split the vote. Cassidy trailed in at 42 percent, and Tea Party candidate Rob Maness at 14 percent. Louisiana’s election rules require a run-off on December 6 between the top two candidates since no candidate topped 50 percent of the vote.

Maness has since rallied conservatives to back Cassidy. Influential conservatives like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-La.) and Sarah Palin have endorsed Cassidy and are participating in “unity rallies” to help him unseat Landrieu.

Louisiana Democrats say that Republicans are late to rally behind Cassidy because he doesn’t inspire confidence within GOP circles. They also point to Maness’s double-digit support in the general election and say those Louisiana voters won’t turn out for Cassidy in the runoff just because national Republicans have now taken an interest in the race.

According to the poll, Landrieu’s big lead among African-American voters – she takes almost 90 percent in the poll to Cassidy’s 7 percent – isn’t enough to make up for Cassidy’s strength among white voters, who in exit polls made up about 75 percent of the electorate in 2014.

Yeah, those pesky white voters. They're really the bane of the Democrats these days, lol.

Nicole Neal vs. Rosie Jones

Some evening lovies.

At Egotastic!, "Nicole Neal Dares to Challenge the Chest of Rosie Jones."

VIDEO: Nancy Pelosi Whines She Didn't Make the Cover of Time in '06, Cries 'Sexism'!

She's a freakin' sore loser, and a disgusting faux "war on women" monger.

Seriously, this takes a lot of gumption.

Waaahh!! Mitch McConnell got a Time cover but I didn't in '06 so it must be sexism! Notice me, dammit! I'm an historic figure, waaaahh!

And all on the same day that the Democrat conference picked her again, despite her epic leadership failures, as Democrat Minority Leader. They say we should expect more lightning strikes because of "global warming." With luck, maybe one of those bolts will take out Pelosi and give San Francisco voters a chance at new representation.

Here's the clip at CNN:

Amazon's Electronics Gift Guide

Your link for shopping today, Presents for Productivity - Amazon's Electronics Gift Guide.

'Maybe tomorrow, the good Lord will take you away...'

Aerosmith, "Dream On," from yesterday morning at the Sound L.A.

Join Together
The Who
9:53 AM

Turn It On Again
Genesis
9:41 AM

Start Me Up
The Rolling Stones
9:37 AM

One Way Out
The Allman Brothers Band
9:32 AM

Magic Man
Heart
9:21 AM

My Life
Billy Joel
9:16 AM

Dream On
Aerosmith
9:12 AM

All Along the Watchtower
Jimi Hendrix
9:08 AM

Crumblin' Down
John Mellencamp
9:04 AM

Why the Republicans Won

From über leftist Elizabeth Drew, at the New York Review of Books.

She's delusional, and analyses like this will only work to keep the Democrats in the minority that much longer.

The Republican sweep, Obama’s blunders, and the influence of dark money: @ElizabethDrewOH on the midterms http://t.co/l7mDCmBnTq

— NY Review of Books (@nybooks) November 11, 2014

Are Democrats Losing the Youth Vote?

From Mark Bauerlein, at the New York Times.

Actually, Dems aren't losing young voters so much as having achieved most of the political successes important to that demographic, especially on social issues like homosexual marriage. It means that --- and I think Bauerlein gets this right --- Millennials are up for grabs, much like the most recent Harvard Millennial poll indicated.

So while this is moderately good news for Republicans, it frankly should have establishment Democrats freakin'. That is, it should have Democrats freakin'. So far, the results of the midterm catastrophe haven't shaken loose the party's delusions of political superiority.

The Kremlin to Resume Long-Range Bomber Flights to U.S. Shores

Barack built this.

At the Los Angeles Times, "Russia resuming Cold War-era bomber flights close to U.S. shores":

Since the Crimea seizure and the violent clashes between Ukrainian troops and Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine spurred a tense new crisis in Russia's relations with the West, the Kremlin's air force has been conducting what European monitors see as provocative forays into and near the airspace of its neighbors.

On Monday, the London-based European Leadership Network reported a sharp increase in Russian air operations that have been condemned by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, including violations of other countries' airspace, narrowly missed collisions, buzzing of NATO and Ukrainian warships and mock bombing runs. Three of the 40 incidents cited in the report were said to have had a "high probability" of causing casualties or military confrontation.

NATO reported last month that the number of incidents involving Russian planes and ships that it considered provocative has tripled this year, to more than 100, including mass aerial maneuvers that posed risks to civilian air traffic in northern and eastern Europe.

More.

Stella Maxwell, Behati Prinsloo and Monika Jagaciak

For Victoria's Secret:

Madison Rising Tribute to the U.S. Marines

Via Theo Spark, "Happy 239th Birthday to the United States Marines from Madison Rising..."

Rosetta Mission’s Probe Lands on Comet

At WSJ, "European Space Agency’s Philae Is First Craft to Land on Comet in Historic Moment for Space Exploration."

Plus, video at Euro News, "Rosetta lander Philae heads towards comet surface."

The Demise of the White Democratic Voter

This is a pretty perceptive piece, from Thomas Edsall, at the New York Times.

We've already been hearing about how the Dems are suffering weakening support among the white working class. See, for example, "Progressive Postmortem: Democrat-Uterus Party May Have Lost White Working-Class Men Once and For All." What Edsall does is indicate how in 2014 Republicans moderated their positions on issues that anger the socially licentious left without losing the support of the very conservative and evangelical voters on the conservative right:

Republicans are not satisfied with winning 62 percent of the white vote. To counter the demographic growth of Democratic constituencies whose votes threaten Republican success in high-turnout presidential elections, Republicans have begun a concerted effort to rupture the partisan loyalty of the remaining white Democratic voters. Their main target is socially liberal, fiscally conservative suburbanites, the weakest reeds in the Democratic coalition. These middle-income white voters do not share the acute economic needs of so-called downscale Democratic voters and they are less reliant on government services.

The Republican strategy to win over these more culturally tolerant, but still financially pressed, white voters is to continue to focus on material concerns – on anxiety about rising tax burdens, for example — while downplaying the preoccupation of many of the most visible Republicans with social, moral and cultural repression.

The current effectiveness of the anti-tax strategy was demonstrated in the unexpected victory of Larry Hogan, the Republican gubernatorial candidate in deep blue Maryland, who defeated Anthony Brown, the highly favored Democratic lieutenant governor.

“The average Marylander sees a governor and legislature willing to impose record tax increases on the rest of us that we don’t need, don’t want and can’t afford,” Hogan declared at the start of his campaign and repeated relentlessly until Election Day.

Hogan won by decisively carrying all the majority white suburbs surrounding Baltimore city, including Howard County, a former bastion of suburban Democratic strength.

In Colorado, Cory Gardner, the Republican Senate nominee, joined the Republican assault on Obamacare and taxes:

The President’s healthcare law has added countless new taxes to millions of Americans, and economic growth will continue to struggle until we can accomplish real, meaningful tax reform. The future of our economy depends on it.

Significantly, Gardner also stiff-armed the Christian right on issues of contraception and abortion in his successful two-point win over Mark Udall, the Democratic incumbent. Gardner highlighted a more culturally tolerant approach when he endorsed over the counter access to the “morning after” pill – a form of contraception many in the right to life movement consider a form of abortion – and when he renounced past sponsorship of a “personhood” constitutional amendment titled “The Life Begins at Conception Act.”

In a mea culpa comment rarely heard in campaigns, Gardner told The Denver Post:

I’ve learned to listen. I don’t get everything right the first time. There are far too many politicians out there who take the wrong position and stick with it and never admit that they should do something different.

Despite this, not only did the Christian right stick with Gardner, but white evangelicals provided his margin of victory. These religious voters, who made up 25 percent of the Colorado midterm electorate, voted for Gardner over Udall by a resounding 70 points, 83 to 13. This margin was enough to compensate for Udall’s 20-point victory, 57 percent to 37 percent, among the remaining 75 percent of the Colorado electorate.

The clear implication of these results for Republican candidates running in 2016 and beyond is that you can break with conservative orthodoxy on some issues to better appeal to a general election electorate without paying the price of losing white Christian support.

Emphasis added.

Via Memeorandum.

Dems Learn No Lessons from Defeat

From Jonathan Tobin, at Commentary:

The contrast between the Republican responses to their election defeats couldn’t be greater. In the aftermath of the 2012 elections, the party underwent a collective soul searching experience that is still resonating in debates about immigration reform and other issues. Though there isn’t complete consensus about what to do, the party’s concern for recruiting good candidates and seeking to stop bad ones from gaining nominations was a start.

But Democrats don’t seem much in the mood for a similar round of introspection. Instead, they prefer to wait until 2016 when they are confident that Hillary Clinton will lead them to victory. That is a possibility. But a smarter party or one that was actually interested in ideas might consider that the loss of so many congressional seats, governors, and state legislative chambers should motivate them to do some soul searching.

It will take a presidential defeat in 2016 to force Democrats to undergo the kind of self-examination that Republicans are struggling with. But if they do, the debris from the decline for the party that Barack Obama’s unpopularity has wrought may take them more than one election cycle to fix. Nothing in politics is permanent, but there is a price that must be paid for ignoring election results. Whether they like it or not, that is one lesson Democrats may eventually learn.

A great piece. RTWT.

Freshman Orientation on Capitol Hill

I like this, at NYT, "Rookies Prepare for Life at Bottom of Congress’s Food Chain."

My new representative, Republican Mimi Walters, was interviewed for the story.

Keri Russell at Glamour 2014 Women of the Year Awards in New York

At Egotastic!, "Keri Russell Looking Incredibly Hot In Leather."

Public Approval of Democrats Falls to Record Lows After the Midterm Elections!

It's hard out there for Che-wannabes and Trotskyite regressives.

At Gallup, "Democratic Party Favorable Rating Falls to Record Low":

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- After the midterm elections that saw the Democratic Party suffer significant losses in Congress, a record-low 36% of Americans say they have a favorable opinion of the party, down six percentage points from before the elections. The Republican Party's favorable rating, at 42%, is essentially unchanged from 40%. This marks the first time since September 2011 that the Republican Party has had a higher favorability rating than the Democratic Party.

Keep reading.

Even self-identified Democrats are dissing the party of our Marxist overlord Barack "The One" Obama.

Doh! Dems Kinda Screwed Up by Dissing Voters' Extreme Economic Anxieties in the Midterms

Yeah, you know, all the polls showed the economy as the Number One issue facing the voters, but the smarter-than-thou Democrats dissed voters concerns to push the stale "war on woman" narrative, not to mention the same warmed-over wage equality bullshit. You can't push for an increase in the minimum wage when people have no jobs in the first place.

From Charlie Cook, at National Journal, "Bad Decisions Came Back to Haunt Democrats in Midterms":

Seventy-eight percent of voters said they were either "very" or "somewhat" worried about the direction of the economy for the next year in the National Election Pool exit poll for ABC, AP, CBS, CNN, Fox, and NBC. Only 21 percent said they were "not too worried" or "not at all worried" about it. Only 29 percent of those polled said they thought the state of the economy was either "excellent" or "good," while 70 percent said either "not so good" or "poor." Just 32 percent felt that the economy is "getting better," the same percentage said it was "getting worse." Thirty-four percent of those polled said the economy was staying about the same. Only 28 percent of respondents said their family's financial situation is better now than it was two years ago; 25 percent said worse, and 45 percent said about the same. Just 32 percent said they thought the U.S economic system is fair to most Americans, compared to 63 percent who say it favors the wealthy. Finally, and most devastating, just 22 percent said that life for the next generation will be better than it is today. More than twice as many—48 percent—said it will be worse, while 27 percent said it will be about the same. As has been reported often, real median family income is no higher today than it was in 2000.

Obama, congressional Democrats, and members of the Democratic Party outside of Washington are paying dearly for having simply checked the box on an economic stimulus package in early 2009 and then quickly moving on to climate change. They passed a cap-and-trade bill through the House—making most Democratic House members walk that plank in favor of the bill—before it became painfully obvious, in about five minutes, that the bill had no chance in the Senate.

In mid-summer 2009, polls universally showed that Americans wanted the president, along with the overwhelmingly Democratic Congress, to focus on the economy and job creation. Instead, in its infinite wisdom, Congress chose to focus almost exclusively and obsessively on health care reform. Although this was a worthy objective, the effort would likely have been better spent in a time when people weren't so worried about their economic well-being. This horrific choice, to focus on the Affordable Care Act rather than the economy, besides costing Democrats their House majority—not to mention platoons of Democratic governors and state legislators who would have been handy in drawing the congressional redistricting maps the next year—created scar tissue that remains to this day.

Americans resent the policy choices that Obama and congressional Democrats made early on. Voters saw little action that would have turned the economy around and created jobs for many working- and middle-class Americans. Their struggle continues to this day, and it cost Democrats their Senate majority last week.

Choices have consequences, and elections have consequences. The decisions of 2009 and 2010 just keep on having consequences for Democrats...

Cook, a leftist, finishes off his piece with a cowardly jab at the Republicans, about how they're damaged goods, that voters still hate them, blah blah. Honestly, if they hated the GOP so much you might think it odd that a majority now says they want Republicans in Congress to lead the country forward in the coming year. But I'll give it up for Cook on his perceptive commentary on the idiot Democrat indifference to Americans' economic pain.

Stunning Goddess Jessica Alba at Baby2Baby Gala in Los Angeles

Baby2Baby's a Los Angeles non-profit that helps provide the bare necessities to babies from disadvantaged families.

And they're not kidding about a gala get-together. More charity for the disadvantaged please!

In any event, Ms. Alba is glorious.

At Popoholic, "Jessica Alba Busts Out Her Glorious Cleavage!"

History Might Not Be on the Democrats' Side

Well, it's sure not looking that way right now, but it's hard to make predictions, especially about the future (with apologies to Yogi Berra).

From David Harsanyi, at the Federalist, "Democrats: History Is On Our Side. History: Good Luck With That":

Just because you’ve chosen a self-satisfying term to describe your ideology and it happens to contain the word “progress,” [it] doesn’t necessarily mean you’re ideas are more enlightened or destined to move forward.

Ouch!

In the Mail: John Nagl, Knife Fights

Available at Amazon, Knife Fights: A Memoir of Modern War in Theory and Practice.

More, Shop Amazon Fashion - Men's Holiday Wish List

Liberals Leftists Are Killing the Liberal Arts

Christ, we're doomed.

From Harvey Silverglate, at WSJ, "Hypersensitivity to the trauma allegedly inflicted by listening to controversial ideas approaches a strange form of derangement — a disorder whose lethal spread in academia grows by the day."

A Smith College alumna is labeled a racist for defending free speech. http://t.co/SkWVoK7Qu4
— WSJ Editorial Page (@WSJopinion) November 10, 2014

You're All I've Got Tonight

From yesterday, during daddy chauffeur hour. (I was off yesterday for Veterans Day, but my boys weren't. November 11th is Armistice Day, and Irvine schools observe the holiday today.)

At the Sound L.A.

The Logical Song
Supertramp
9:56 AM

Dixie/Sweet Home Alabama
Lynyrd Skynyrd
9:42 AM

American Pie
Don McLean
9:33 AM

Back In Black
AC/DC
9:30 AM

Free Ride
The Edgar Winter Group
9:19 AM

You're All I've Got Tonight
The Cars
9:15 AM

Tumbling Dice
The Rolling Stones
9:12 AM

American Woman
The Guess Who
9:08 AM

Beautiful Girls
Van Halen
9:04 AM

Somebody's Baby
Jackson Browne
9:00 AM

Tell Women Not to Rape!

At CNN, the growing list of female sex offenders.

The New Era of Communication Among Americans

Somehow I don't think this is all good.

At Gallup:

Somehow frustrating the older gen RT @GallupNews: The Trend Line: Younger Americans Text More, Speak Less. WATCH: http://t.co/sSDDEX6N2H!

— Noah Rothman (@NoahCRothman) November 10, 2014

PRINCETON, N.J. -- Texting, using a cellphone and sending and reading email messages are the most frequently used forms of nonpersonal communication for adult Americans. Between 37% and 39% of all Americans said they used each of these "a lot" on the day prior to being interviewed. That compares with less than 10% of the population who said they used a home landline phone or Twitter "a lot."

Keep reading.

Brianne Howey for Maxim

"A behind the scenes look at the blonde bombshell of Horrible Bosses 2."

Nice:

Jihadists in Egypt Pledge Loyalty to #ISIS

Lovely.

At the New York Times, "Militant Group in Egypt Vows Loyalty to ISIS."

Narcissistic Obama 'Willing to Blow His Party and the Country Up'

I love Pat Caddell, heh.

Via Nice Deb:

Terror Decentral

From Caroline Glick:

In the postmortems of the terrorist car attacks in Jerusalem, it is easy to see the writing on the wall.

Ibrahim al-Akary, the terrorist who on Wednesday ran over crowds of people waiting to cross the street and catch the Jerusalem Light Rail, was the brother of one of the terrorist murderers freed in exchange for IDF hostage Gilad Schalit. He had placed the photograph on his Facebook page of Moataz Hejazi, the terrorist killed by police after shooting Yehuda Glick outside the Begin Heritage Center last Wednesday.

A few days before Abdur Rahman Slodi got into his car and mowed down three-month-old Chaya Zissel Braun and a dozen other pedestrians two weeks ago, PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas exhorted the Palestinians to prevent Jews from visiting the Temple Mount, Judaism’s holiest site, by all means possible.

Slodi had served time in prison for terrorist offenses and was active on social media where he expressed murderous hatred for Jews and a desire to kill them.

So yes, the writing was on the wall. But unfortunately, the writing is on all the walls, or Facebook walls. It is not at all clear how Israeli security services could have known to distinguish these men from the thousands of other Palestinians and Jerusalem Arabs who hate Israel, support the murder of Jews and identify with various terrorist organizations.

On Thursday security forces arrested several people in villages around Hebron with suspected ties to Akary. So he may not have been acting on his own. But all the same, neither he nor Slodi seem to have been directed to carry out their attacks by a cell commander who himself was directed by a higher level terrorist operative. Rather, in all likelihood, something triggered both men to carry out attacks in a wholly independent or semi-independent manner.

The question is, what was the trigger and how was it pulled?

Uh, Palestinian Jew-hatred?

Nah. Can't be that.

But continue reading, just in case.

Countdown to Black Friday

At Amazon, Shop Amazon - Countdown to Black Friday Deals in Camera, Photo and Video.

Can You Hear Our Marines?

Via Theo Spark:

Palestinians Murder Israelis in Stabbing Attacks

At NYT, "Two Israelis Die in Separate Stabbings by Palestinians."

Also at the Times of Israel, "Young woman killed in West Bank stabbing attack," and "IDF soldier stabbed in Tel Aviv attack dies of wounds."

Plus, video via Reuters, "One dead, three wounded in Palestinian stabbing attacks: Israeli Police."

Khamenei's Genocidal Ideology

A rather startling piece, from Michael Rubin, at Commentary.

Binky Felstead

She's got an interesting name, and then some.

At London's Daily Mail, "Binky Felstead poses in lingerie for a sexy calendar shoot":

The 24-year-old reality star has posed for a 2015 calendar. Binky says: 'They are the most sensual pictures I have ever shot.'

Debbie Wasserman Schultz Issues the Democrat Party Autopsy!

Well, it's a preliminary Democrat Party autopsy.

The DNC chairwoman announces that she's initiating a "top-to-bottom" review of what went wrong last Tuesday.

But you'll have to watch it at the link. She's just too damned butt-ugly to embed this clip, heh: "A Message from Chair Wasserman Schultz."

OMG! Breitbart Loretta Lynch 'Correction' is the Biggest News Since Forever to Infinity!!

It's been a terrible week for leftists.

The voters delivered the worst midterm shellacking in history. President Obama was hammered with a "wall-to-wall" repudiation the likes of which we'll never see again. The left's "War on Women" lays splattered on the floor and abandoned like a botched late-term abortion, and the Democrat Party establishment is being mercilessly ridiculed as an old white people's party that been's hollowed out like a rotten vegetable.

Heh, good times, I know.

But not so great for the far-left fever swamp losers, a coalition of dirtbags now cheering a rather routine correction to a Breitbart article by Warner Todd Huston. Oh sure, the Breitbart team might have done a wee bit more fact-checking before posting the hit piece, but I'm going out on a limb here to suggest that this isn't the most important story of the day. It's pretty pathetic, indeed. The idiot Democrat losers are still crushed from the midterms, so by the looks of Memeorandum I guess a journalistic flop at the hated Breitbart is cause for celebration.

Oh, how low the once mighty "majority of the ascendant" has fallen. I almost feel sorry for the bastards, except, well, not. Heh.

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi Killed in Iraq Airstrikes?

Well, numerous reports indicate that al-Baghdadi has been hit.

If he's dead that would finally be something for which Obama could claim credit --- and boy, does he need something, anything!

Here's CNN:

Pot's Not Cool — It Shrinks Your Brain!

Perfect for leftist Democrat potheads.

At WaPo, "Marijuana is no longer illegal in D.C. — but it’s still lame everywhere."

And here's the chaser, at LAT, "Regular pot smokers have shrunken brains, study says."

Smaller brains, heh. I'm sure that helps explain why Barack "Choom" Obama is such a terrible president.




IMAGE HAT TIP: Moonbatty, "The Choom-Head in Chief."

Multicultural Explosion Brings Growing Pains Across the U.S.

Look, I'm for pulling back on immigration.

We need to assimilate those who're already here. But hey, mention that to the depraved leftist open-borders progs and RAAAAACIST!!

At USA Today, "Growing Pains: Multicultural explosion rattles residents."

RELATED: The late political scientist Samuel Huntington, more relevant than ever, Who Are We?: The Challenges to America's National Identity.

Taylor Swift Held 'Secret' Listening Sessions to Promote '1989'

She's taking full advantage of social media to stay ahead of the changing market environment. Seems like it's working out pretty well.

At LAT, "Taylor Swift connects with fans via 'secret sessions,' media blitz":

One of the brilliant aspects of Taylor Swift's rise to pop stardom is the way she's managed to convince millions of fans, the majority of whom are women her age or younger, that she's one of them.

It's central to the message of her new album's first single, "Shake It Off." The song's Mark Romanek-directed video paints Swift as out of her element in various clichéd, pop video settings: as a dysfunctional Lady Gaga-esque performance artist; trapped in a Miley Cyrus-like twerk-off; flailing as a ballerina — only to find her mojo working as part of a group of ordinary people — non-professional actors that Swift again helped select through social media. The video has racked up almost 200 million views in the matter of a few weeks.

"Shake It Off" echoes previous hits including "You Belong With Me" and "Mean": At heart Swift identifies as a nerd — and a proud one at that — a stance that works in her favor as she strives to give voice in many of her songs to the unhip and socially awkward.

Never mind that Swift is a multimillion-selling recording artist who writes, performs and often produces monstrously successful hit singles and albums. She's also one of the few pop culture figures who can score the cover of Elle, People and Rolling Stone magazines while presiding over a multimillion-dollar music empire.


"Taylor's got many, many good things going for her," said Tony Pace, chief marketing officer for Subway restaurants, one of several major corporate alliances Swift is exploiting to promote the new album. "She's astute about social media and she's a very serious and committed artist."

To be sure, Swift has no shortage of haters. Her relatively thin voice is technically no match for powerhouses like Kelly Clarkson and Carrie Underwood, and anonymous Internet commenters toss out barbs for the perceived trail of A-list broken hearts she's left behind (and perhaps tapped for songwriting inspiration), including musician John Mayer, actors Jake Gyllenhaal and Taylor Lautner, and One Direction heartthrob Harry Styles.

One of the new album's sassiest tracks, "Blank Space," was sparked by what was being written about her in the tabloids.

In the song, she brags that "I've got a long list of ex-lovers / They'll all tell you I'm insane / Looking at that face / You look like my next mistake."

"I pride myself on being self-aware," she told her living-room audience. "But I've also noticed there's this drastic fictionalization of my personal life in the press.

"They'll write that I'm needy, that I push people away then pull them back," she said. "I found all this fascinating. So I thought, 'What if I were this girl — this damaged starlet thing? I'm going to write a song as if I were her.'

"I started writing [it] as a joke," she said, "but it ended up being everyone's favorite."

More, "Taylor Swift loses mind, smashes, slashes in new 'Blank Space' clip."

The APEC Happy Campers

Uh, not.

At Foreign Policy:

Shinzo Abe and Xi Jinping’s painfully awkward meeting and handshake in Beijing. http://t.co/BHPUdX4vPZ pic.twitter.com/8UPOHnTXCv
— Foreign Policy (@ForeignPolicy) November 10, 2014

Also at WSJ, "Frosty Handshake Between Japan, China Leaders Hardly Heralds Long-Awaited Détente."

Obama Gets Back to His Indonesian-Muslim Roots with Purple Silk Shirt for APEC

Obama protests the shirts, apparently. But you know secretly he's all down home when he dons these silky fashion items. It brings back all the memories of his Muslim upbringing in Indonesia.

At the Hill:

Obama dons purple silk shirt for APEC family photo http://t.co/qDtfisaQeP pic.twitter.com/wI0tfUmNKX

— The Hill (@thehill) November 10, 2014

Wearing black and purple silk robes, Presidents Xi and Obama take seats for fireworks display for APEC leaders. pic.twitter.com/hVAOgWMsYh

— Mark Knoller (@markknoller) November 10, 2014

Added, heh:

@AmPowerBlog @BigFurHat @Blazingcatfur @kshaidle No, you mean his Mao-Commie roots.

— Bill Quick (@DailyPundit) November 10, 2014

Well, I see Muslim roots all over this pic. But hey, when you're buddying up with the Communist dictator of China you're open to all kinds of totalitarian interpretations.

Whether it's an Indo-Muslim silk robe, or a Communist Mao Jacket, it's for certain that hate-troll Walter James Casper's fully down with it!

— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) November 10, 2014

Remembrance Day 2014: Tower of London Poppies

At the Independent UK, "Remembrance Day 2014: Tower of London Poppy installation captured by drone camera."

Also, at the Toronto Sun, "Tower of London poppy display takes on life of its own."

And CBS Evening News had a wonderful feature the other night:

Obama Lies About Voter Desires in Midterms

Heh, at Jammie Wearing Fools, "Deranged Obama Lies About Voter Desires in Midterms: “They’d like to see more cooperation”":

Um, no. They want to see the end of your insanity.

Lolz.

Obama Needs to Learn How to Lose Graciously

Well, you think?

Zogby Report Card: Obama needs to learn how to lose graciously http://t.co/fivGmwfnpM pic.twitter.com/MzpAD1DFDV

— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) November 10, 2014

Progressive Postmortem: Democrat-Uterus Party May Have Lost White Working-Class Men Once and For All

When the New York Times starts playing Taps for your party, you know your ideological program is truly circling the crapper.

And it's not just the idiotic focus on reproductive rights issues and the faux "war on women." When the foundation of your political agenda is to demonize traditional white people as racist flyover rubes, it's no surprise when those same people run from your candidates like a boatload of West African Ebola patients.

See, "Democrats Say Economic Message Was Lacking":

WASHINGTON — For all the finger-pointing among Democrats over Tuesday’s election calamity, the White House, Congress and party establishment all share responsibility for weaknesses that the defeats laid bare, critics say, and should confront them as the 2016 contest takes shape.

The problems are fundamental, involving questions of where Democrats focus their party-building efforts, what voters they talk to, and most crucial, what they say to those voters. Missing this year, many Democrats say, was a broad economic message to enthuse supporters and convert some independents.

While the Democrats’ loss of their Senate majority owed much to the fact that they were defending so many seats in the Republican-friendly South and West, that dynamic only underscored the lost promise of Barack Obama’s famed 2004 declaration that there is no red and blue America, only a United States of America — a belief he reiterated, “for all the cynics who say otherwise,” on Wednesday.

However naïve his pronouncement — both then and now — as a candidate in 2008 Mr. Obama built up organizations and hopes among Democrats even in conservative places like Alaska, North Dakota and Idaho. In February 2008, more than 14,000 people jammed a Boise State University hall to hear him speak. “They told me there weren’t any Democrats in Idaho,” Mr. Obama exclaimed. “But I didn’t believe them.”

Yet during his presidency, the national party has set aside that build-it-and-they-will-come approach and allowed the 50-state strategy that Howard Dean, the former chairman, oversaw to wane, focusing instead on Democratic strongholds and battlegrounds. And rarely has Mr. Obama visited states that are not Democratic blue or swing-vote purple.

“We’ve suffered from the neglect of the campaign committees out here,” said Larry LaRocco, a former Idaho congressman. He and other state Democrats had sought help from the national party for local Democrats, given hopes kindled by Idaho Republicans’ infighting and flawed candidates. Despite Tuesday’s Republican wave, Idaho Democrats did gain a state legislative seat and came close in other contests. “With some resources in here we could have a field day,” Mr. LaRocco insisted.

But even he does not argue that conservative Idaho should be a party priority, only that to forfeit states and regions ensures Democrats cannot compete.

More broadly, Democrats across the country are increasingly debating how or even whether they should be doing more to win voters largely lost since the 1960s civil rights era — men, and especially working-class white men.

Some Democrats are resigned, if not content, to all but give up since white men are a shrinking share of the electorate, while the expanding ranks of single women and Latino, African-American and young voters strongly favor Democrats.

But while that gives Democrats the edge in picking presidents, it hurts them in midterm elections because so many of their supporters skip voting in nonpresidential years, leaving a whiter, older and less female electorate that favors Republicans.

The midterm drop-off of Democrats’ core supporters “has reached historic levels,” Ruy Teixeira and John Halpin, analysts at the left-leaning Center for American Progress, wrote after the election.

When combined with white men’s overwhelming support for Republicans, the outcome, as on Tuesday, is Democrats’ defeat. In North Carolina, Colorado and Iowa — states where Democrats lost Senate seats after campaigns that emphasized abortion rights, birth control coverage and pay equity for women — support from female voters was disappointing, and swamped by men’s margins for the Republicans.

In North Carolina, where more than a third of voters were white men, Senator Kay Hagan lost their votes by 42 points, 27 percent to 69 percent, exit polls showed. Senator Mary L. Landrieu got support from just 15 percent of white men who voted in Louisiana’s multicandidate contest, a result that helps explain why she is considered likely to lose a Dec. 6 runoff election against the Republican Bill Cassidy.

Yeah, well, I guess all that emerging Democrat majority palaver was just a bunch of crap all along. Brain-dead leftists have been marinating in the hope-and-change myths for so long now that the reality is coming as really quite a shock. Whites are still 75 percent of the midterm voting population. It's going to be quite a few more election cycles until all the so-called "old, racist white people" die off. Meanwhile, the Democrat-uterus losers can't even hold onto their numbers among Latinos, women, and Millennials.

But keep reading, in any case.

It's been a great week. A freakin' great week.

Women in Academia Angered by Sexy Ph.D. Costume

What aren't they angry about?

Academic feminists are the world's biggest harpies and they won't stop harping until they've made the other 99.9 percent of the world's population miserable as well.

At College Insurrection, "Sexy Ph.D. Halloween Costume? No one seems to have a sense of humor anymore."

Democrat Midterm Autopsy

Actually, the DNC hasn't offered an autopsy yet, and I doubt they will until they complete the stages of grief. (And I have no idea how long the denial stage lasts.)

But some folks are trying to get a head start, realizing (grudgingly) that a narrow focus on so-called "women's issues" like "equal pay" isn't doing the trick.

See NYT's Room for Debate (FWIW, heh), "Can the Red Tide Be Turned Back?"

I don't see anything particulary "bold" at the link, nor does what you'll see amount to any "grand vision" other than repackaging most of the progressive complaints about race, immigration, and "inequality" we've heard throughout the Obama years. The only surprise is that Thomas Piketty's not a contributor, lol!

Scott Walker All but Declares That He's Seeking the Presidency

According to Ann Althouse.



Well, he's a proven winner. What can you say?

Er, Democrats Having Hard Time on Messaging After the 'Great Shellacking' of 2014

Heh, a great clip from Fox & Friends Weekend.

Sunday Cartoons

At Flopping Aces, "Sunday Funnies."




Also at Randy's Rountable, "Friday Nite Funnies," and Reaganite Republican, "Reaganite's SUNDAY FUNNIES."

Still more at Legal Insurrection, "Branco Cartoon – Tears of the Clowns," and Theo Spark's, "Cartoon Round Up..."

CARTOON CREDIT: William Warren.