Thursday, January 5, 2017

On the Structural Safegaurds of the U.S. Constitution

From James Piereson, at the New Criterion, "Populism, V: A bulwark against tyranny":
The framers of the Constitution did not use the term “populism,” but they were aware of the phenomenon it describes—that is, an uprising by the voters against what they judge to be a corrupt or out-of-touch elite. James Madison, for example, referred to something roughly similar in his extensive discussions in the Federalist of factions and “factious majorities.” To a considerable degree, the challenges posed by “populism” were front and center in the debates that eventually produced the Constitution. For better or worse, the framework Madison was instrumental in creating does not easily allow for the kind of popular referendum through which a majority of voters in Great Britain decided to pull that country out of the European Union, or the more recent referendum in Italy through which voters turned down a package of constitutional reforms. In this sense, the U.S. Constitution operates as an impediment to populism because it substitutes representation and deliberation for national referenda and direct democracy.

In the United States, of course, voters can decide to pull out of a treaty or an alliance or repeal a law, but they must do so indirectly by first electing a willing President and Congress, and then hoping that the two can find enough common ground to enact a program—and then sustain that program through subsequent elections. Under the U.S. Constitution, a populist “moment” is not sufficient to win the long game; the moment must be sustained over a sequence of elections such that a temporary uprising of voters is translated into a durable governing majority, which is a difficult thing to accomplish in a country as large and diverse as the United States, as the Founders well understood.

The populist moment that we seem to be in, here and abroad, is a propitious occasion to reconsider some contemporary assumptions about democracy and majority rule in relation to the arguments advanced by the Founders on those same subjects. Many today are instinctively inclined toward democracy and majority rule but are also worried about the implications of “populism.” Can they have it both ways? After all, populism, to the extent that we use it in a pejorative way, implies that majority rule is not always a good thing, and that, as James Madison argued in the Federalist, there can be “bad” majorities as well as “good” ones. How do we tell the difference? And how does one design a system to deter or to deflect these “bad” majorities? Once we raise such questions, we enter into the political and intellectual world of Madison and the Founders...
One of the key points I made repeatedly last semester, when lots of people were freakin' out about Donald Trump, is that our Constitution is strong enough to handle whatever comes along. We survived the Civil War, the Great Depression, and World War II. I expect we'll survive the Trump regime just fine. Indeed, all this talk about "fascism" on the left is really leftist extremism in defense of favored progressive policy priorities. Seriously, these people are unhinged.

But keep reading.

Kendall Jenner Snake Tattoo for V Magazine

At Drunken Stepfather, "KENDALL JENNER, JOAN SMALLS AND LARA STONE FOR V MAGAZINE OF THE DAY."


Struggling with the Costs of Growing Old: Many Slip Out of Middle Class as Aging Takes Its Toll

A fascinating column, from Steve Lopez, at the Los Angeles Times, "Not rich, not poor, and not ready for the cost of growing old."

I've got a least 10 more years before retirement, and probably quite a few more, if I'm feeling well. I take the winters and summers off. Basically, I'm working eight months out of the year. I can hack it past the traditional retirement age, and meanwhile I can be socking away money into my retirement accounts. My wife's seven years younger, and healthy, so we've got a while to plan for those "drought" years (although, as noted, if things stay as they are, I think my family will avoid the "drought" years, thank goodness).


Boomers are crowding the retirement turnstiles just as safety nets may get a haircut from a Republican Congress fixated on an Obamacare repeal that could whack Medicare and Medicaid. And although President-elect Trump has defended entitlements, a key advisor once called for privatizing Social Security. California has been a national leader in supporting in-home care and expanding medical insurance to wider populations, but federal funding cuts could jeopardize those advances.

“Everything is a wild card right now,” said UCLA professor Steven Wallace, chair of the school’s Department of Community Health Sciences.

Wallace co-authored a report published last year on what he refers to as California’s “hidden poor,” approximately 655,000 older adults who are above the federal poverty level and ineligible for some government programs, but not wealthy enough to live comfortably in a region with such high housing costs.

I know those people. I’ve met many of them and written about some of them.

Doris Tillman comes to mind. She’s the South Los Angeles retiree who went nine months without running water after losing a job and falling behind on a Los Angeles Department of Water and Power bill she disputed.

“I’m going to write a book about how to survive in L.A. without water,” the 71-year-old Tillman told me at the time. She learned to get by on 50 gallons a week of water she purchased, lugging heavy five-gallon jugs into and out of her car and into her home.


Deirdre McCloskey: Economic Growth Saves the Poor

A great essay, at the New York Times:


Playboy Playmates Pick the Best Songs of All Time (VIDEO)

I feel like making love!

Via Playboy:


Nina Agdal Bonus LOVE Advent 2016 (VIDEO)

The lovely Ms. Nina brings us back to some babe blogging for the afternoon.

The news out of Chicago is just too sickening.


Jeff Sessions Faces Onslaught from the Most Ugly and Dishonest Political Activists in America

From J. Christian Adams, at Pajamas, "Pray for Jeff Sessions":

Everyone who believes in prayer should say some for attorney general nominee Jeff Sessions. Senator Sessions is experiencing the full wrath of the worst hateful lies that the modern Left and Democrat Party can conjure. Lies, half-truths, and smears have become the strategy to attack his nomination.

The age of Obama has seen the rise of bricks-and-mortar operations with deep cash reserves designed to permanently transform the nation, and the Justice Department has been ground zero. That's why Jeff Sessions is the perfect pick for attorney general, and that's why the liars on the Left are willing to smear this good man. They've served up all their familiar charges against him from their phobia smorgasbord: homo-, xeno-, Islamo- or trans-.

That's why the NAACP decided to trespass and occupy his Senate office -- an action far worse than the one that landed James O'Keefe in jail (banner photo above). Don't expect Loretta Lynch to do anything. Who commits the crime is sometimes more important than what they did. O'Keefe played for the wrong team.

Sessions' opponents hate that he understands them better than most in Washington, and understands the damage they have done transforming the nation in the last eight years...
Keep reading.

Sessions is perhaps the best pick of the entire cabinet. I can't wait until he gets to work!

FLASHBACK: "Why Jeff Sessions Has Conservatives So Fired Up."

Greta Van Susteren to Join MSNBC

Just now, via Greta's Twitter feed:


And at Politico:


How the Democrats Became the Anti-Israel Party

From Daniel Greenfield, at FrontPage Mag, "The Left can’t stop hating and killing Jews":
Democrats have come down with a wicked virus. Somewhere along the way they caught Nazi fever.

It’s not the Nazi fever of the fevered headlines in which Trump is the new Fuhrer and Republicans are the new Third Reich.

The truth is that there’s only one major political party in this country that supports the murder of Jews.

The Democrats demand the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Jerusalem. They fund the mass murder of Jews by nuclear fire, rocket, bullet, bomb and bloody knife. And they collaborate and defend that terror.

President Clinton was the first to openly fund Islamic terrorists killing Jews. Men, women and children across Israel were shot and blown up by terrorists funded by his administration. And when terror victims sought justice, instead of protecting them from Iran, he protected Iran’s dirty money from them.

And he was not the last.

Secretary of State John Kerry and National Security Adviser Susan Rice collaborated with the leaders of a terrorist organization, with American and Israeli blood on its hands, on a UN attack on Israel that demands that Jews be banned from moving into neighborhoods and areas claimed by Islamic terrorists.

A leaked transcript showed Kerry conspiring with Saeb Erekat, who has praised the mass murderers of Jews and spewed anti-Semitism. Erekat is called a “negotiator”, a strange term considering that the PLO and its various front groups, including the Palestinian Authority, refuse to negotiate with Israel.

Erekat has made his position on the Jewish State quite clear. “We cannot accept the Jewish state – Israel as a Jewish state – not today, not tomorrow and not in a hundred years.”

Instead of reproving Erekat, Susan Rice warned him about Trump. Rice, like the rest of Obama’s team, was not only closer to the terrorists than to Israel, but was closer to the terrorists than to Trump.

Obama praised PLO boss Abbas despite the terrorist leader’s own admission, “There is no difference between our policies and those of Hamas.” The terror organization headed by Obama’s pal had honored a monster who butchered a 13-year-old Jewish girl in her own bedroom as a “martyr”.

The White House backed the Muslim Brotherhood whose “spiritual” witch doctor had praised Hitler and expressed a wish that Muslims would be able to finish the Holocaust.

Sheikh Rashid Ghannouchi, another beneficiary of Obama's Jihadist Spring, endorsed genocide. "There are no civilians in Israel. The population—males, females and children... can be killed.”

When this monster, who had called for the extermination of the Jews, visited the United States, he was honored at a dinner whose speakers included Obama’s Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State.

If the left really wants to find Hitler and Nazism, it ought to look in the mirror. The Democrats have become a political movement that aids and celebrates the mass murderers of Jews.

And they keep playing the victim...
Keep reading.

Black Chicago Thugs in Facebook Live Beating Charged with Hate Crimes (VIDEO)

The Chicago press conference is live on television right now. More on that later.

Meanwhile, at the Chicago Tribune, "Hate crime, kidnapping charges filed in West Side attack streamed on Facebook Live":


Hate crime charges have been filed against four people shown in a Facebook video attacking a mentally disabled man, cutting his scalp with a knife and punching him while yelling obscenities about Donald Trump and "white people."

Jordan Hill, 18, of Carpentersville, Tesfaye Cooper, 18, of Chicago, Brittany Covington, 18, of Chicago, and Tanishia Covington, 24,  of Chicago were charged with aggravated kidnapping, hate crime, aggravated unlawful restraint and aggravated battery with a deadly weapon.

Hill also was charged with robbery, possession of a stolen motor vehicle and residential burglary, while Cooper and Brittany Covington were charged with residential burglary.

The victim, an 18-year-old man reported missing by his parents in Crystal Lake this week, is shown crouching in a corner on a video carried on Facebook Live.  His wrists are bound and his mouth is taped shut.

As a woman shoots the video, two men cut the man's shirt with knives, then take turns punching him and stomping his head.  One of the men cuts the victim’s hair and scalp with a knife, and it appears the man is bleeding.

As the man crouches against a wall, someone shouts, “F‑‑‑ Donald Trump” and “F‑‑‑ white people.”

The attackers on the video appear to be black and the man appears to be white, though police declined at a news conference Wednesday evening to give the race of the attackers or the victim. The attack appears to have taken place on the West Side...
Still more.

And at Memeorandum.

Wednesday, January 4, 2017

Chicago Teens Post Racially-Motivated Hate Crime Against Special Needs Man on Facebook (VIDEO)

It's black Chicago teens. This is the real racism in America today, not the alleged racist fascist Nazi violence of Donald Trump supporters.

This is the logical result of the left's cancerous politics of hatred and division.

Dana Loesch is sickened and angry, plus the CBS News 2 Chicago report below:




More at World Star Hip Hop, "Chicago Teens Allegedly Kidnapped a Man and Beat Him on Facebook Live!"

Full video here.


Refuse Fascism

Following-up from previously, "Fascism vs. Right-Wing Populism."

I think it's important to nail down exactly what we're talking about. Professor Sheri Berman is right that Donald Trump and right-wing populist movements are not fascist. She's wrong when she demonizes Trump and right-wing populists as threat to current democratic norms and institutions.

Getting these things right is particularly important, since the smear of "fascism" is being thrown around like so much confetti on New Year's Eve.

Here's this big push by the leftist interested group "Refuse Fascism," which published a full-page advertisement in today's New York Times.

As I've said, Trump's not fascist. But if leftists keep pushing and pushing, publishing these smears in all the "correct" outlets, then even your non-political teenybopper down at the mall with be denouncing Trump supporters as "fascist" threats to the "democratic order."

Talk about fake news. Sheesh.

See, "Call to Action to STOP Trump and Pence BEFORE they Come to Power."


(Frankly, since the election, the most significant threats to democratic norms --- like the legitimacy of the Electoral College --- have come from the left. But that doesn't matter to all the "correct" people at the "correct" outlets and institutions, like the MSM and academe. Frankly, the truth doesn't matter to the left, unless it's a truth that advances their agenda. We're in for a wild ride.)

Fascism vs. Right-Wing Populism

Sheri Berman is an excellent political scientist. I like her work a lot. But in two recent pieces on the surge in populism she can't resolve some key inconsistencies in her writing. The main thing is (1) she wants to argue Donald Trump (and right-wing populists in Europe) are not fascist, but (2) this same surging "right-wing [populist] extremism," in Berman's terminology, is still a threat to democracy.

I don't think you can have it both ways. For Berman, if the structural variables that were present in the Interwar period in Europe --- countries in physical ruin after WWI, extreme economic crisis, including the Great Depression, the breakdown of traditional hierarchy, especially aristocracy, absent the consolidation of democratic regimes --- were present today, we'd see the return of fascism.

She doesn't say in so many words, though. She only goes so far as to say that Trump and European "right-wing extremists" threaten current democratic norms and should be challenged, lest they threaten the democratic order.

See for example, Berman's piece from the November/December issue of Foreign Affairs, "Populism Is Not Fascism," and especially the conclusion:
The best way to ensure that the [Marine] Le Pens and Trumps of the world go down in history as also-rans rather than as real threats is to make democratic institutions, parties, and politicians more responsive to the needs of all citizens. In the United States, for example, rising inequality, stagnating wages, deteriorating communities, congressional gridlock, and the flow of big money to campaigns have played a bigger role in fueling support for Trump than his purported charisma or the supposed authoritarian leanings of his supporters. Tackling those problems would no doubt help prevent the rise of the next Trump.

History also shows that conservatives should be particularly wary of embracing right-wing populists. Mainstream Republicans who make bogus claims about voter fraud, rigged elections, and the questionable patriotism and nationality of President Barack Obama in order to appeal to the extremist fringes are playing an extremely dangerous game, since such rhetoric fans citizens’ fear and distrust of their politicians and institutions, thus undermining their faith in democracy itself. And just like their interwar counter­parts, these conservatives are also likely enhancing the appeal of politicians who have little loyalty to the conservatives’ own policies, constituencies, or institutions.

Right-wing populism—indeed, populism of any kind—is a symptom of democracy in trouble; fascism and other revolutionary movements are the consequence of democracy in crisis. But if governments do not do more to address the many social and economic problems the United States and Europe currently face, if mainstream politicians and parties don’t do a better job reaching out to all citizens, and if conservatives continue to fan fear and turn a blind eye to extremism, then the West could quickly find itself moving from the former to the latter.
Actually, democracy is not in trouble.

Donald Trump is not an "also-ran" but the president-elect who will take office as the 45th president of the U.S. on January 20th.

Berman's problem, I would argue, is that she sees populist rejection of left-wing policies as threats to democracy. They are not.

Her other piece, which specifies the nature of fascism much better than at Foreign Affairs, is at Vox, "Donald Trump isn’t a fascist."


It's good, but like I said, Berman fails to persuasively explain why so called "extreme" right-wing populist movements threaten democracy.

These movements, at least in the U.S., don't even threaten democratic norms, and her examples (like Trump's rejection of intelligence findings on Russian hacking) aren't in fact cases of deviations from such norms. And of course, the same things that Berman claims right-wing populist are doing, like rejecting election results, are exactly what Democrats and leftists have done since the election. So, why aren't far-left movements, socialism, neo-communism, and anti-neo-liberalism, in fact threats to democracy? The reason is that leftists have double-standards, and for them threats to democratic norms are only seen when populists reject leftist policies.

Until Berman and others can offer an even-handed argument for fascism vs. right-wing populism (or left-wing populism, for that matter), their commentary and research will be rejected as nothing more than partisan hackery.

'Pink Houses'

From yesterday's driving-around time, at the Sound L.A. (I picked up my son from school and then made a Walmart run for some groceries.)

John Mellencamp:

Lola (Mono 'Cherry Cola' Single Version)
The Kinks
3:51 PM

Dancing in the Dark
Bruce Springsteen
3:47 PM

Can't You See
The Marshall Tucker Band
3:41 PM

Let's Dance
David Bowie
3:37 PM

Fat Bottomed Girls
Queen
3:33 PM

Pinball Wizard
The Who
3:26 PM

Go Your Own Way
Fleetwood Mac
3:23 PM

Shake It Up
The Cars
3:19 PM

I Shot the Sheriff
Eric Clapton
3:15 PM

Pink Houses
John Mellencamp
3:10 PM

Stairway to Heaven
Led Zeppelin
3:02 PM

'Thanks for not Photoshopping my thighs...'

I think, as a matter of public service, Glamour really needed to Photoshop Lena Dunham's thighs.

My god, is this the new standard of Glamour for today's young women? How sickening.

Via Ms. Rachel on Twitter, "If the average and the drab can achieve Glamour without effort, then the magazine is obsolete."

At Newser, "Lena Dunham to Glamour: Thanks for Not Photoshopping."


Deaf Baby Boy Hears Mom's Voice for the First Time (VIDEO)

I wasn't born deaf, but I have a hearing impairment from a head injury when I was 21.

I wear a hearing aid. Most people don't realize I have an impairment when I'm talking to them. I read lips. My voice is a bit muffled, creating something of a Mr. Magoo effect, but most people never remark on it.

But because if this, I always see these "baby hears" videos with a special joy. Sometimes I used to think I'd rather be blind than deaf. You never really know how cherished are your senses until you've lost one of them, or more.

In any case, seen on Twitter just now (and this isn't the first clip like this I've posted):

Senate Moves to Repeal ObamaCare (VIDEO)

Senators were actually working on this yesterday, their first day back on the Hill.

At Roll Call, "Senate Republicans Start Obamacare Repeal Process":

Senate Republicans wasted no time Tuesday setting in motion their plan to repeal President Barack Obama’s signature health care law.

GOP senators intend to strike large portions of the law while avoiding the threat of a Democratic filibuster through a procedural gambit that expedites Senate consideration of the repeal bill.

But Democrats aren’t going down without a fight.

On Tuesday, Senate Budget Chairman Michael B. Enzi started the process known as reconciliation. A fiscal 2017 budget resolution the Wyoming Republican unveiled on the first day of the 115th Congress includes instructions to two House and two Senate committees to craft legislation reducing the deficit by $1 billion over the next ten years.

To do so, those committees will draft bills repealing portions of the health care law. Senate debate is not subject to cloture, meaning 60 votes are not required to end debate. Republicans, with their 52-seat majority, will be able to advance the repeal without needing any Democratic defections.

One of the committees with jurisdiction is Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions and the panel’s chairman, GOP Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee said Tuesday that any repeal bill will be crafted “carefully.” Lawmakers have until Jan. 27 to draft the measures.

But before then, Democrats plan to put Republicans on the record regarding certain provisions of the 2010 health care law.

Senate Minority Whip Richard J. Durbin said Democrats plan to offer health-related provisions when the Senate votes on amendments to the budget resolution. A marathon vote series known as a vote-a-rama is expected next week...
More.

Not sure why she mentions the cloture rule isn't in effect, mainly because the filibuster still applies to legislation (despite this whole debate over killing the filibuster). Normally floor debate is held when a bill is ready to be sent to conference, and thus it would be defeated in the Senate before that if there wasn't a 60-vote level of support. I've tweeted to Bridget Bowman for an answer.

The Wages of Trump Derangement Syndrome

From Roger Kimball, at Pajamas:
There will continue to be a lot of flailing [after Trump's election], a lot of wailing and abuse. But among the many things that changed during the early hours of November 9 was a cultural dispensation that had been with us since at least the 1960s, the smug, "progressive" (don't call it "liberal") dispensation that had insinuated itself like a toxic fog throughout our cultural institutions — our media, our universities, our think tanks and beyond. So well established was this set of cultural assumptions, cultural presumptions, that it seemed to many like the state of nature: just there as is a mountain or an expanse of ocean.  But it turns out it was just a human, all-too-human fabrication whose tawdriness is now as obvious as its fragility.

What we are witnessing is its dissolution. It won't happen all at once and there are bound to be pockets of resistance. But they will become ever more irrelevant even if they become ever shriller and more histrionic. The anti-Trump establishment is correct that what is taking place is a sea change in our country. But they are wrong about its purport.  It is rendering them utterly irrelevant even as it is boosting the confidence, strength, and competence of the country as a whole. Glad tidings indeed...
RTWT.

Hat Tip: James Taranto, at his final entry for the "Best of the Web" column at WSJ, "Finale." (I read that on my iPhone. My normal Google workaround for the subscription paywall didn't work. I'm thinking about subscribing to the newspaper this year, perhaps as part of a new change for my reading habits.)

An Embarrassing Start for the New GOP Congress

Actually, maybe House Republicans shouldn't have caved to the pressure, from Trump or elsewhere.

Following-up from yesterday, "House Republicans Retreat from Ethics Change Following Backlash."

See the Wall Street Journal editorial board, "Fake Ethics Reform Fiasco":
The burning question in the media has been whether Mr. Trump or public outcry deserve credit for the GOP’s about-face. In any case, House Republicans will pay a political price for trying, then failing, to rush through ethics changes—after running on draining the D.C. swamp. By caving so precipitously at the first sign of opposition, they’ve also invited more such pressure campaigns.

The upshot is an embarrassing start for a new GOP Congress that is supposed to be stalwart for pursuing conservative reform no matter the opposition. Progressives are elated that their Trump “resistance” project notched a victory and will continue the fact-free outrage campaigns. If you think the political pressure is intense on ethics rules, wait until the left completes its nationwide talent search for the person most harmed by the GOP’s health-care proposals. Mr. Trump will also figure he can rout any opposition with a tweet, not that he’s known for restraint.

The shame is that a review of the ethics office is overdue, much as due-process rights have suffered under the Obama Administration—from college campus show trials to bankrupting legal companies. Maybe Congress can restore its own due-process guarantees after it does something for everyone else’s.
RTWT.

George Hawley, Right-Wing Critics of American Conservatism

This looks interesting.

At Amazon, Right-Wing Critics of American Conservatism.

Rose Bertram's Tahitian Paradise (VIDEO)

Via Sports Illustrated Swimsuit:


Tuesday, January 3, 2017

As Cops Retreat Under Political Pressure, Chicago Homicides Rise 57 Percent

At WSJ, "Murder and Policing in Chicago":

Former Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy told CBS’s “60 Minutes” this weekend that the increase in paperwork has taken time away from proactive policing and made officers more reluctant to stop suspicious individuals. According to CBS, the number of stops declined from 49,257 in August 2015 to 8,859 a year later while arrests fell by a third to 6,900. While current Superintendent Eddie Johnson denied that police were retreating, he noted at a press conference this weekend that anger at police has “emboldened” criminals. He also blamed lax enforcement of Chicago’s strict antigun laws.

All of this suggests that the demonization of cops has contributed to Chicago’s surge of violence, with the principal victims being young minorities, many of them innocent bystanders. Perhaps the President could include an elegy for these black lives in his farewell.
RTWT.

House Republicans Retreat from Ethics Change Following Backlash

I wasn't following politics too closely today. Indeed, I took my son to school and came home and went back to sleep. I woke up at Noon and the GOP ethics reform story was getting tremendous coverage at Memeorandum.

If House Republicans indeed retreated because Donald Trump tweeted his displeasure, that's gotta be a significant development. The GOP (and many in the conservative) establishment dissed Trump during the Republican primaries, lots of these people being part of the "Never Trump" movement. So it's interesting to see now the kind of power Trump can wield with a single tweet.

In any case, at WSJ, "House GOP Drops Bid to Undercut Ethics Board":

WASHINGTON—House Republicans on Tuesday dropped their effort to curb the independence of a nonpartisan ethics board after a fierce backlash to it eclipsed other news on the first day of the new session of Congress.

Meeting behind closed doors on Tuesday, House Republicans unanimously decided to scrap their effort to place the independent Office of Congressional Ethics under the oversight of the House Ethics Committee, a move that would leave lawmakers policing themselves. That move, announced late Monday night, drew swift pushback from government-watchdog groups, Democrats and some Republicans, who heard from angry constituents about the proposal.

President-elect Donald Trump, in tweets Tuesday mornings, questioned the timing of the move over other congressional priorities.

“It’s like a circular firing squad—our first day here and we’re passing around the handgun,” lamented Rep. Rod Blum (R., Iowa).

As criticism mounted Tuesday, Republicans decided midday to abandon the measure for now, though lawmakers said they would try to advance changes to the ethics watchdog later this year. Lawmakers have raised concerns over the board, including objections that it makes complaints against them public.

House Republicans meeting Monday night had approved, by a 119-74 vote, the amendment from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R., Va.) to a package of new House rules. Both House Speaker Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) and Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R., Calif.) had objected to the amendment, urging a bipartisan approach to changing the office.

It wasn’t clear that the rules package would have had the votes to pass, given that it was likely to garner no support from Democrats, and some Republicans objected to the ethics amendment.

In two tweets Tuesday morning, Mr. Trump seemed to express sympathy with the move on its merits, calling the watchdog office “unfair.” But he said, “With all that Congress has to work on, do they really have to make the weakening of the Independent Ethics Watchdog, as unfair as it…may be, their number one act and priority.” He added that he would prefer a focus on issues “of far greater importance!”

The Office of Congressional Ethics serves as the chamber’s independent ethics watchdog by reviewing allegations against House members and staff. It is governed by an eight-person board of private citizens who don’t work for the government...
Still more.

Best of LOVE Advent 2016 (VIDEO)

Heh, I haven't been too consistent posting these LOVE videos. They're nice though.



How Megyn Kelly's Move to NBC Could Change the Cable News Landscape

Following-up from earlier, "Megyn Kelly to Join NBC News."

I watched the "Kelly File" tonight, looking to catch the last of Ms. Megyn's appearances on Fox News. Unlike a lot of conservatives during the GOP primary (especially on Twitter), I wasn't critical of her. I liked her approach. I think Trump said some nasty things. I don't like him any less, but I don't think he shouldn't be called out from time to time.

In any case, it's going to be interesting at Fox News with Megyn gone. The network will be fine. The New York Times reported today that network executives have no plans to change the conservative programming that's made Fox the leader in cable news. That's good. On the other hand, I liked the more news/analysis feel of the 6:00pm hour (Pacific time) between O'Reilly and Hannity. Indeed, I always get a kick with how the "Kelly File" opens with "BREAKING TONIGHT!" It seems so urgent, heh.

In any case, at WaPo:

Megyn Kelly's wholly unsurprising decision to leave Fox News to join NBC leaves a void at the network where she spent the past 12 years, and perhaps nudges the cable news juggernaut in a new direction — while opening the door for media rivals.

Kelly confirmed her job change in a message Tuesday on Twitter after it was first reported by the New York Times.

Already a cable news star before the 2016 election cycle began, Kelly became a household name as she remained poised amid nasty attacks by Donald Trump, who objected to her line of questioning at the first Republican primary debate. Last January, Fox News's then-chairman, Roger Ailes, rejected Trump's demand that the network replace Kelly as a moderator of the second debate, even as the billionaire threatened to boycott the event — which he did.

When former Fox News host Gretchen Carlson accused Ailes of sexual harassment in a lawsuit in July, prompting 21st Century Fox to launch an investigation, Kelly shared her own claim of harassment by Ailes, who resigned later that month.

From then on, Kelly seemed to be viewed as a traitor by some Ailes loyalists who remained at Fox News. Sean Hannity called her a Hillary Clinton supporter in October. Bill O'Reilly criticized Kelly's decision to air dirty laundry in a book released in November.

“If somebody is paying you a wage, you owe that person or company allegiance,” O'Reilly told CBS News. “You don't like what's happening in the workplace? Go to human resources or leave. I've done that. And then take the action you need to take afterward if you feel aggrieved. There are labor laws in this country. But don't run down the concern that supports you by trying to undermine it.”

Kelly's departure from Fox News appeared inevitable. But now that it is here, it is worth considering the effect on cable news...
An interesting piece.

Keep reading.

At at the bottom tweet above, Ms. Megyn announces she leaving the network.

How Close is #USC Football to Winning the National Championship?

I think they're very close.

As long as they've got Sam Darnold at QB, I think USC could win the national championship next year. I think they're that good.

At LAT, "How close is USC to winning a national championship?":

In a boisterous corridor outside the winning locker room following a classic Rose Bowl game on Monday evening, Lynn Swann, USC’s athletic director, was asked if the win meant the Trojans were back at the top of college football.

"No, if we were back at the top of the national landscape, we'd be playing on Monday, January 9th,” Swann said, referring to the national championship game. “We're not there yet. It's a building process.”

USC’s nine straight wins, its sizable chunk of returning talent and its quarterback, Sam Darnold, will likely thrust the Trojans into the national championship hunt next season. So, how close are they to being capable of winning it?

In short, they’re two offensive tackles, one linebacker, one defensive tackle and a couple receivers away. The return of a couple playmakers — receiver JuJu Smith-Schuster and cornerback and return specialist Adoree’ Jackson — wouldn’t hurt either.

Whether USC can effectively plug those holes will determine whether it is a playoff or national championship team next season.

One player has elevated expectations to such levels: Darnold, who as a freshman set Rose Bowl records with five touchdown passes and 473 yards of total offense in a 52-49 victory over Penn State. It seems a foregone conclusion that he will begin next season as a Heisman Trophy front-runner. The hype is already stratospheric.

The morning after USC’s Rose Bowl victory, ESPN was teasing to a commercial with questions such as: "Will Sam Darnold be as good as Vince Young? We'll debate, next."

One his radio show, Colin Cowherd said Darnold is “the best quarterback I've ever seen at USC.” Darnold, he said, reminded him of Andrew Luck and Brett Favre.

Darnold deserves to be praised, but no team can win with one player alone. Much attention in the coming days will be given to Jackson and Smith-Schuster, who will decide whether to enter the NFL draft or return for their senior seasons. Both have said that coming back to compete for a national championship is attractive. But both are considered high-round draft prospects.

After the game, Smith-Schuster said he would “take about a few days” to make his decision. Jackson was noncommittal. “I don't know,” he said. “I'm out here living in this moment.”

The focus on Jackson and Smith-Schuster obscures what might be more impactful losses: offensive tackles Chad Wheeler and Zach Banner.

Unlike at cornerback, where there is a replacement, Jack Jones, waiting in the wings, or at receiver, where Darnold prefers to spread the ball around to many options, there are no clear replacements at tackle, where mistakes can be magnified.
More.

Deal of the Day: Save 35 Percent or More on Sheer Strength Fitness Supplements

At Amazon, Today's Deals.

BONUS: John Prados, Storm Over Leyte: The Philippine Invasion and the Destruction of the Japanese Navy.

This 'May Have Been the Most Exciting Rose Bowl Game Ever...'

That's Penn State Head Football Coach James Franklin, at the Los Angeles Times:

The enormity of it all seemed to stun USC Coach Clay Helton. Some fans had called for Helton’s job after USC started his first full season 1-3. After Monday’s game, he stood atop confetti with an arm around his son, Turner, his eyes a little wet as he watched the band.

“It felt like a tennis match, just going back and forth and back and forth, the mood swings and the emotion,” Helton said. “It was an amazing game. It’s what fairy tales are made of.”

Penn State Coach James Franklin conceded that it “may have been the most exciting Rose Bowl game ever.”

He had a point. Penn State’s Saquon Barkley ran 25 times for 194 yards and two touchdowns and caught a touchdown pass.

Darnold passed for 453 yards with one interception and five touchdowns, a Rose Bowl game record. His total yards of 473 set another record, breaking Vince Young’s 467 in 2006 against USC.

Darnold stood near Helton as the band played, and he looked as though he had just awoken from a nap. USC players said they couldn’t remember a time when they’ve seen him rattled.

As he huddled the offense with 1:59 to play, USC down by seven points and 80 yards to go, his voice was calm.

“I just said, ‘Do your job,’” Darnold said.
More.

And see Bill Plaschke's front-page column at today's newspaper, "USC fights on and on — and wins a thrilling Rose Bowl on a last-second field goal."


British Fashion Model Louisa Warwick Blue Bikini in South Florida

At Egotastic!, "Louisa Warwick Blue Bikini Super Fine Female Form in South Florida."

Gwen Stefani is the New Face of Revlon (VIDEO)

I'm happy for her!

And Gwen Stefani's from Fullerton, Orange County, so it's good for the hometown rep, heh.

At London's Daily Mail, "She's red hot! Gwen Stefani unveiled as new face of Revlon."





Megyn Kelly to Join NBC News

Megyn Kelly's out at Fox News.

Her bottom line was $20 million, which Fox had already guaranteed in a renewed contract. But I'm sure Fox was toxic after the Roger Ailes sexual harassment episode, and I think perhaps to some extent Kelly's controversy with conservatives on her treatment of Donald Trump was an issue. Obviously, for her it was time to move on.

At Politco and CNN:


Also, all over Memeorandum.


ADDED: Stelter, speaking on CNN, said the "bottom line here" is that Kelly wanted to get away from Fox News, to the point of taking a pay cut to do so. Apparently, she's going to have a roving "Katie Couric-type role" at NBC, and better hours, so she can spend more time with her family.

Monday, January 2, 2017

USC Beats Penn State in Rose Bowl, 52-49 (VIDEO)

I just can't get this thing out of my head. Folks are going to be talking about this game for a long time.

Here's the totally apt headline at SB Nation, "USC beats Penn State in the game of the year, with the most points in any Rose Bowl ever":
Penn State and USC entered on a combined 17-game winning streak. The Lions and Trojans both hadn’t lost since the weekend of Sept. 23-24, when USC lost at Utah and Penn State lost at Michigan. Both had been a buzzsaw ever since, and they only missed the Playoff because they got started just a little too late this season.

The Trojans capped their brilliant run in style, finishing the year 10-3 after a 1-3 start. They’ll be a popular Playoff pick heading into next season, and the emergence of Clay Helton as a really smart-looking head coach hire now has another chapter...
And at USA Today:


I'll have more.

The Los Angeles Times sportswriters are still working on their coverage. It's going to be a full separate pullout section tomorrow, I'm sure, part of the overall Rose Parade/New Year's Day reporting. It's glorious. I swear USC winning the Rose Bowl is just one of those things. If you're a Southern Californian, it doesn't get any better.

After Penn State scored three touchdown on three plays to start the second half, I thought the momentum was over. USC was done.

I had hope though, and it was prescient:


And check the highlights:



More later.

Deal of the Day: FitDesk 2.0 Desk Exercise Bike

At Amazon, Today's Deals.

Also, AmazonBasics Apple Certified Lightning to USB Cable - 6 Feet (1.8 Meters) - White.

BONUS: Wallace Stegner, Angle of Repose.

Finished My Name Is Lucy Barton

It's frankly a weird little book.

There's something about contemporary fiction that just doesn't do it for me. The spare minimalism is one thing. The Elizabeth Strout book reminded me of Marilynne Robinson's Gilead, which won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 2005 (similarly spare and minimalist).

Elizabeth Strout photo download_zpsgwtdxnju.jpg 
Strout's book is much better, thank goodness. With My Name Is Lucy Barton, I can actually recall the story, the tempo and crescendo, of the novel. There was a kind of emotional gut punch near the end there, so I can see why the book got prodigious praise. I mean really, it got a ridiculous amount of praise for such a slim novel. Indeed, its slimness seems to be one of its main virtues. I guess critics thought Strout packed an emotional wallop for such a tiny tome.

The other thing is the obligatory politically correct left-wing politics. The main character Lucy lives in New York City, after having grown up in poverty (and family household abuse) in Illinois. It's thus got the sensibility of the East Coast leftist elites, a sensibility that's just been rejected at the ballot box with Donald Trump's election in November.

But then, I found out about the book at the New York Times, so I'm only inflicting punishment on myself.

I don't want to overdo it, though.

As you know, I just love to read. The book has its moments. I just think it's popular because it checks all the right leftist boxes. It name-checks homosexuals and the AIDS crisis, making the reader get all emotional for the "toll" on the victims, as the novel's flashbacks are set in the 1980s. And there's also the au courant feminist epistemology. The book makes it cool for marriages to end in divorce. You know, the demise of these unions is all about feeding the "me" culture. Marriages aren't about struggle, emotional toil, and the hard work of making relationships work --- to say nothing of sticking it out for the children. I mean shoot, when Lucy bails on her marriage, she knowingly bails out on her children, despite the umpteen times she expresses her everlasting love for them throughout the story. Strout doesn't dwell on that (and on that inconsistency). She doesn't dwell on how Lucy might be screwing up her kids to feed her own happiness. It's a "me" thing, you see. Lucy's sad about her divorce. Sure. That's part of the emotion of the book. But there's not much internal discussion of the sanctity of the marriage commitment in terms of family and the integrity of the matrimonial vows. That would be "old fashioned," you know.

In any case, it's best to be well-rounded, which is why I read all this stuff in the first place. It certainly gives me something to blog about. And of course I can drop names with my leftist colleagues. When I do I'm usually way more well-read than my college's hipster leftist professors.

So, if you're up for a quick read, and a fairly pleasurable one, all things considered, check it out.

At Amazon, My Name Is Lucy Barton.

Kendall Jenner: American Power's Woman of the Year for 2016

I almost forgot to post my woman of the year!

And who else could it possibly be?

Kendall's been my woman of the year all year, heh.


PREVIOUSLY: "Nina Agdal: American Power's Woman of the Year for 2015." (And click through there to see the previous years' winners.)

The U.S. Economy: Donald Trump's Newest Branding Effort

At LAT, "Donald Trump's newest branding endeavor: the economy":
Throughout his campaign for president, Donald Trump painted a gloomy picture of the American economy, scoffing at employment data that he said masked the truth.

“Our jobs are being stolen like candy from a baby,” the Republican said at an election-day rally in Michigan, lamenting how he saw global competitors like China outmaneuvering the U.S. economically. “They take our money. They take our jobs. They build their plants. They build their factories. We end up with unemployment and drugs.”

But his stunning election win seemed to change his —  and to some extent the public’s — outlook. The media-conscious president-elect has quickly adopted a role as the greatest cheerleader for an economy that was already on the rebound.

“The U.S. Consumer Confidence Index for December surged nearly four points,” Trump crowed in a tweet this week, noting in all caps that it reached a 15-year high. He added, with characteristic immodesty: “Thanks Donald!”

Donning the mantle of economic optimist is a time-honored tradition for presidents, who are seen as perhaps the most singularly influential person over the economy. Trump’s outlook, however, is notable for the reversal from the campaign and for his promotion of the unproven assertion that he himself is having a positive influence on the economy, even before he takes office.

“It’s clear that there’s been a bounce in sentiment since the election,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Analytics. “Now, is that because he won the election or just because people are happy the election’s over? That’s impossible to know.”

The statistics Trump touts fit well into his view of a world divided into who’s up and who’s down, winners and losers. In place of the daily trickle of state and national political polls that dominated his campaign remarks, he has turned to the Consumer Confidence Index as well as the daily stock market closings for what he sees as his successes.​​​​​​

Like he did with polls, Trump has cherry-picked economic data. The Consumer Confidence Index did not suddenly rise after Trump’s election; it has, like other indicators, trended upward since bottoming out shortly after the 2008 economic collapse. Its first major spike came shortly after the inauguration of President Obama, and saw a similar uptick after his reelection in 2012.

Additionally, it is a volatile index, subject to negative pressure from political circumstance as well — most notably a 2011 battle over raising the nation’s debt limit that pushed the country to the brink of a historic default.

And another key part of his economic message, the touting of new jobs as if he were singularly responsible for their creation, ignores that they usually resulted instead from efforts already underway. On Wednesday, he trumpeted news that telecom company Sprint and technology start-up OneWeb would hire a total of 8,000 workers in the U.S. —  calling it "very good news" for the economy.

But OneWeb, which is building a network of satellites to deliver high-speed Internet access, said nine days earlier that it expected to create nearly 3,000 jobs in the U.S. over the next four years after securing $1.2 billion in funding, mostly from Japan's SoftBank Group Corp. And the head of SoftBank, which owns Sprint, had said on Dec. 6 that the company had agreed to invest $50 billion in the U.S. and create 50,000 jobs here...
Keep reading.

Donald Trump Says 'No Computer is Safe'

He doesn't email, but he's not quitting Twitter anytime soon.

Word is he'll send communications by courier.

At the Resurgent:


Keith Jackson Returns to the Rose Bowl

Jackson's last broadcast was the Rose Bowl 2006, which was the national championship game that year, Texas vs. USC. I can't forget that game. USC was so close. Arrghh!

In any case, Jackson, who called games with ABC Sports from 1986 to 2006, is attending today, the first (full) game he's attended since retiring.

At LAT:


David Horowitz, The Left in Power

Start the new year off right.

With David Horowtiz, at Amazon, The Left in Power: Clinton to Obama: Black Book of the American Left: Volume VII.

Emily Ratajkowski Hits 10 Million Followers in Instagram

At Maxim:


BONUS: Emily topless here.

Sunday, January 1, 2017

Sunday Cartoons

At Flopping Aces, "Sunday New Year’s Funnies."

Branco Cartoons photo Lame-Duck-Fuse_zpsl5t0w5rl.jpg

Also at Theo's, "Cartoon Roundup."

Cartoon Credit: Legal Insurrection, "Branco Cartoon – Angry Duck."

Rule 5 Links

Here's a quickie.

At Drunken Stepfather, "STEPLINKS OF THE DAY."

Also, 90 Miles From Tyranny, "Morning Mistress."

At Theo's, "Chrissy Teigen, Bar Refaeli, Genevieve Morton & More Around the World - Sports Illustrated Swimsuit."

Also, at Hollywood Tuna, "Bella Thorne In Her Calvin’s." And WWTDD, "Bella Thorne Has Arrived.

And from the founding Rule 5 blog, the Other McCain, "Rule 5 Monday: Boxing Day Edition."


Elizabeth Strout, My Name Is Lucy Barton

*Bumped.* [I'm about halfway through this book.]

This book is highly recommended at that New York Times piece on 2016 books in review.

And since I finished Exodus, I thought I'd check this one out.

I like fiction, although I don't post links to novels that much.

I'll update once I've read a few chapters (to let you know if it's any good).

At Amazon, Elizabeth Strout, My Name Is Lucy Barton: A Novel.

Carnegie Deli

There's a Carnegie Deli at the Mirage Hotel, Las Vegas.

I think we're going to Vegas in February. I'm not sure when, although we're celebrating my oldest son's 21st birthday.

Maybe I'll head over there for mountain-high pastrami on rye, heh.

The New York Carnegie's is now closed. Apparently lines were down the street, but mostly filled by tourists. Seems kinda weird, but apparently New York diners are choosing less expensive, and less kosher, alternatives.

At the New York Times:


Kendall Jenner LOVE Advent 2016 (VIDEO)

I'm posting out of order at this point, but I just love Kendall:


At Least 35 Gunned Down in Istanbul Nightclub Massacre

Turkey is a mess.

It's a jihad nightmare.

At USA Today:


Holiday Hooliganism Traced Back to the Obama Administration

From Heather Mac Donald, at City Journal, "Violence in the Halls, Disorder in the Malls":

Judging by video evidence, the participants in the violent mall brawls over the Christmas weekend were overwhelmingly black teens, though white teens were also involved. The media have assiduously ignored this fact, of course, as they have for previous violent flash mob episodes. That disproportion has significance for the next administration’s school-discipline policies, however. If Donald Trump wants to make schools safe again, he must rescind the Obama administration’s diktats regarding classroom discipline, which are based on a fantasy version of reality that is having serious real-world consequences.

The Obama Justice and Education Departments have strong-armed schools across the country to all but eliminate the suspension and expulsion of insubordinate students. The reason? Because black students are disciplined at higher rates than whites. According to Washington bureaucrats, such disproportionate suspensions can mean only one thing: teachers and administrators are racist. The Obama administration rejects the proposition that black students are more likely to assault teachers or fight with other students in class. The so-called “school to prison” pipeline is a function of bias, not of behavior, they say.

This week’s mall violence, which injured several police and security officers, is just the latest piece of evidence for how counterfactual that credo is.  A routine complaint in police-community meetings in minority areas is that large groups of teens are fighting on corners. Residents of the South Bronx’s 41st Precinct complained repeatedly to the precinct commander in a June 2015 meeting about such street disorder. “There’s too much fighting,” one woman said. “There was more than 100 kids the other day; they beat on a girl about 14 years old.” In April 2016, a 17-year-old girl in Coney Island, Brooklyn, Ta’Jae Warner, tried to protect her brother from a group of girls gathered outside her apartment building who were threatening to kill him; one of the group knocked her unconscious. She died four days later. At a meeting in the 23rd Precinct in East Harlem in 2015, residents asked why the police hadn’t stopped a recent stampede of youth down Third Avenue. In April 2012, a group of teens stomped a gang rival to death in a Bronx housing project.

The idea that such street behavior does not have a classroom counterpart is ludicrous. Black males between the ages of 14 and 17 commit homicide at ten times the rate of white and Hispanic males of the same age. The lack of socialization that produces such a vast disparity in murder rates, as well as less lethal street violence, inevitably will show up in classroom behavior. Teens who react to a perceived insult on social media by trying to shoot the offender are not likely to restrain themselves in the classroom if they feel “disrespected” by a teacher or fellow students. Interviews with teachers confirm the proposition that children from communities with high rates of family breakdown bring vast amounts of disruptive anger to school, especially girls.  It is no surprise that several of the Christmas riots began with fights between girls.  School officials in urban areas across the country set up security corridors manned by police officers at school dismissal times to avoid gang shootings. And yet, the Obama administration would have us believe that in the classroom, black students are no more likely to disrupt order than white students. Equally preposterous is the claim that teachers and administrators are bigots. There is no more liberal a profession than teaching; education schools are one long indoctrination in white-privilege theory. And yet when these social-justice warriors get in the classroom, according to the Obama civil rights lawyers, they start wielding invidious double standards in discipline...
Keep reading.


Shop Gold Box Deals

At Amazon, Today's Deals.

And check out, The Twilight Zone: The Complete Series.

Also, Band of Brothers.

BONUS: James D. Hornfischer, The Fleet at Flood Tide: America at Total War in the Pacific, 1944-1945.

The Right to Disconnect

I don't ever "disconnect." I might not check my emails for a while, but I'm always available.

It's not that big of a deal to me.

But see the Washington Post, "French employees can legally ignore work emails outside of office hours":

That 10 p.m. email from your boss? It's your right to ignore it.

That Saturday ping from a colleague with “just one quick question?” A response on Monday should suffice.

If you're in France, that is.

French workers rang in a new year at midnight — as well as a “right to disconnect” law that grants employees in the country the legal right to ignore work emails outside of typical working hours, according to the Guardian.

The new employment law requires French companies with more than 50 employees to begin drawing up policies with their workers about limiting work-related technology usage outside the office, the newspaper reported.

The motivation behind the legislation is to stem work-related stress that increasingly leaks into people's personal time — and hopefully prevent employee burnout, French officials said.

“Employees physically leave the office, but they do not leave their work. They remain attached by a kind of electronic leash, like a dog,” Benoit Hamon, Socialist member of Parliament and former French education minister, told the BBC in May. “The texts, the messages, the emails: They colonize the life of the individual to the point where he or she eventually breaks down.”

France has had a 35-hour workweek since 2000, but the policy came under scrutiny recently given France's near-record-high unemployment rate.

The “right to disconnect” provision was packaged with new and controversial reforms introduced last year that were designed to relax some of the country's strict labor regulations. The amendment regarding ignoring work emails was included by French Labor Minister Myriam El Khomri, who reportedly was inspired by similar policies at Orange, a French telecommunications company.

“There are risks that need to be anticipated, and one of the biggest risks is the balance of a private life and professional life behind this permanent connectivity,” Orange Director General Bruno Mettling told Europe1 radio in February. “Professionals who find the right balance between private and work life perform far better in their job than those who arrive shattered.”
Well, I don't think your life's going to be "shattered" by checking your email, and as a professor, I know that a lot of the emails are from students. So I check it throughout the day. It's no big deal.

In any case, keep reading.

For the Past 37 Years, the Droz Family Has Taken a Picture in Front of a Numbered Highway Sign for Their Annual Holiday Card

Well, that takes a lot of motivation. I can't even get motivated to mail out holiday cards at all.

At WSJ, "Every Year, the Droz Family Scours America for the Best Road Sign to Make the Perfect New Year Card":

Dan Droz went for a drive one day last month. He stopped near rural Carlisle, Pa., about three hours from his Pittsburgh home, at his destination.

The junction of Route 17 had been on his radar for a while. Mr. Droz wanted a picture in this particular location this year, and only this year, for his annual holiday card.

Every year for almost four decades, like millions of families around the world, the Drozes mail a holiday card to hundreds of their friends. That’s where the similarities between their card and other cards end.

Their card isn’t a Christmas card or a Hanukkah card. It isn’t even really a holiday card. They call it a New Year’s card.

It’s what’s on their card that makes it curious. The Droz clan’s New Year’s card is more than a mere family portrait. It’s a family portrait underneath a sign that represents the road junction that corresponds with the coming year—like Route 17 for 2017.

Their epic pursuit of the perfect card requires years of scouting, months of planning and hours of driving. For many years it forced them to wake up at 6 a.m. the morning after Thanksgiving. It has taken the Drozes to several states, one town called Eighty Four, Pa., and a few places where they should not have been.

Their quests began in 1979, when Mr. Droz was a single father with a young daughter, Lani. He picked a spot near the intersection of Interstates 79 and 80 where signs for both roads could be in one shot. They were soon apprehended by a skeptical cop with a sensible question: Why are you stopped by this seemingly random sign on the side of the road?

“We’ve had to explain that many times,” Mr. Droz said.

It wasn’t long before there was another problem. The people on his mailing list weren’t used to receiving this type of card. They had the same question as the unsuspecting police officer: What exactly is this?

Mr. Droz, who runs his own marketing agency, made sure there was less confusion the next year. He chose a convenient intersection of Interstate 80 and Interstate 81 and replaced the words on the I-81 sign with “New Year” to help his friends understand why he was waving from a busy highway. “I’ve made it more vérité since then,” he said.

That card worked in ways he never could have imagined. At a holiday party, Mr. Droz happened to meet a woman named Cathy, who worked as a producer for “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood.” He called her for dinner but never heard back. He called her again about a drink—still nothing.

And then he tried one last trick: He sent her his New Year’s card. She responded by sending back a postcard with Fred Rogers’ face.

“Nice card,” she wrote. “Let’s get together.”

They were married by the time the next card was sent.

Ms. Droz made her debut in the 1982 card. She also gave Mr. Droz a white sweater as a gift that has survived the elements—and ketchup stains—and appeared in every card since. They had three more children who have been in the New Year’s cards from the years they were born...
More.

These people are more than nerds. They're full on geeks, but obviously the lovable kind. Ben Droz, whose tweet is posted above is "a hemp lobbyist and event photographer in Washington, D.C., who also runs a hemp bolo-tie business."

See what a mean, lol?

New Year's Eve Prankster Changes Hollywood Sign Overnight to Read 'Hollyweed' (VIDEO)

Well, this state is "Cali-weed" now, so I guess it's appropriate.

At ABC 7 Los Angeles, "HOLLYWOOD SIGN ALTERED TO READ 'HOLLYWEED' IN APPARENT NEW YEAR'S DAY PRANK."