#ObamaCare Marriage Penalty Pushes Brooklyn Couple to Consider Divorce

At Breitbart, "Married Couple Considers Divorce to Save Money on Obamacare."

And at the Atlantic, of all places, "The Hidden Marriage Penalty in Obamacare":

The first time I heard Nona Willis Aronowitz talk about getting divorced to save money on health insurance I thought she couldn't really be serious. We were at Monte's, an old Italian place in South Brooklyn, having dinner with a group of New York women writers in late July.

"Don't do it!" I urged her, certain, having watched my friends over the years, that no matter how casually she or her husband might treat the piece of paper that says they are married, getting unhitched would inevitably change their relationship as profoundly as getting hitched in the first place.

But with the arrival of the Affordable Care Act's insurance exchanges, the question for Nona and her husband Aaron Cassara moved from the realm of casual conversation to a real financial conundrum. Aged 29 and 32, respectively, they were facing tough times for their professions, a wildly expensive city, and the scary prospect that both of them could shortly be uninsured. Right now Nona only has a COBRA plan—"which I can barely afford"—that ends January 1, she tells me. Her last staff job ended when the media outlet she was working for laid off its whole editorial team; she's been a full-time freelancer since. Aaron, a filmmaker who works part-time and also freelances, has been uninsured since her layoff, because it would be too expensive to have him on COBRA too.

Any married couple that earns more than 400 percent of the federal poverty level—that is $62,040—for a family of two earns too much for subsidies under Obamacare. "If you're over 400 percent of poverty, you're never eligible for premium" support, explains Gary Claxton, director of the Health Care Marketplace Project at the Kaiser Family Foundation.

But if that same couple lived together unmarried, they could earn up to $45,960 each—$91,920 total—and still be eligible for subsidies through the exchanges in New York state, where insurance is comparatively expensive and the state exchange was set up in such a way as to not provide lower rates for younger people. (Subsidy eligibility is calculated using a complicated formula involving income in relation to the poverty line, family size, and the price of plans offered through a state's marketplace.)

Nona and Aaron's 2012 income was higher than the 400 percent mark, but not by much. In New York City, that still doesn't take you very far for two people. If their most recent months of income are in the same range, they will get no help at all with buying insurance through the exchanges if and when they apply, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation and eHealth subsidy calculators. Premiums for the two for silver-level plans came in at $9,248 for the year.

But if they applied as unmarried individuals with something like their 2012 income, one of them would get at least $3,964 in subsidies toward the purchase of a plan, or possibly even be eligible for Medicaid, thanks to their uneven individual earnings that year. And if they fall below the 400 percent threshold, which Nona says they might this year, they could get substantial subsidies as a couple that are still worth less than what they'd be eligible for as individuals. These gaps are the marriage penalty.

Continue reading.

Look, progressives are doing all they can to destroy the institution of marriage. The ObamaCare marriage penalty is just one more weapon in the left's arsenal against moral decency, tradition, and basic self-sufficiency.

Obama's Second Term FUBAR as Approval, Personal Favorability Hit the Crapper

At the Wall Street Journal, "Health-Law Rollout Weighs on Obama's Ratings, Agenda: Approval, Personal Favorability Polling Sags, Creating New Complications for Second Term" (via Cracker Squire):

President Barack Obama, bogged down by problems with his signature health-care program, is seeing both his approval and personal-favorability ratings with Americans sag, creating new complications for his second-term agenda.

During past turbulence in Washington, Americans' approval of the job Mr. Obama is doing dipped. But in those stretches, Mr. Obama was buoyed by voters' general admiration for him as a person and by their trust in his credibility.

That has changed recently, particularly as thousands of Americans lose their insurance coverage under the health law's rollout, despite the president's pledge that anyone who liked their current plan could keep it.

The president has apologized to Americans about the insurance-cancellation notices, and he is taking other steps to shore up his political standing. But if his reservoir of personal goodwill continues to diminish, it could hamper him at a time when his administration is trying to repair the insurance website on which much of the Affordable Care Act rests.

An Obama administration official said the recent standoff over the government shutdown and raising the nation's borrowing limit was bound to take a toll on the president's popularity. "I think the president took on the least amount of water after that fight than any of the other actors involved," the official said.

Going forward, Mr. Obama wants to enlist the public as allies in the push to pass an immigration overhaul, expand access to early-childhood education and raise the minimum wage. All these goals already are drawing resistance from congressional Republicans, and if the public sours on him, the job is that much more difficult.

"His credibility is hurt, because he said things that aren't quite true," said Lou D'Allesandro, deputy Democratic leader in the New Hampshire Senate, referring to the vow that Americans could keep their health plans. "Unless a couple of dramatic things happen, he could be a lame duck by January."

A survey released last week by the Pew Research Center found the president's approval rating at 41%, down 10 points since May. Pew's pollsters compared Mr. Obama's fortunes to the slide that former President George W. Bush saw. At a comparable point in Mr. Bush's second term—after Hurricane Katrina had hit—Mr. Bush's job approval stood at 36%.

By contrast, second-term support for Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan held steady in Pew polling, with 58% and 62% of the public, respectively, approving of their job performance at a similar point in their presidencies.

Chris Lehane, a former Clinton White House official, said that Mr. Obama's "political success depends on maintaining trust" and that the White House must work to keep intact this "most precious leadership asset."

"Second-term presidents have hit those moments when they lost the trust of a critical mass of the public…which effectively made them lame ducks," Mr. Lehane said. He said he doesn't believe Mr. Obama has reached that point.

Mr. Obama also is facing an increasingly uneasy Democratic contingent in Congress, with some lawmakers worried the rollout of the health law might damage their election prospects. Last week, Mr. Obama met with Democratic senators facing re-election in 2014, some of whom aired their complaints about the implementation of the health law. Later, Mr. Obama flew to Louisiana on Air Force One with one such senator, Louisiana's Mary Landrieu. After the plane landed, the president and Ms. Landrieu went separate ways: Mr. Obama to a port in New Orleans, Ms. Landrieu to an event in the western part of the state. Her office said she had a previous commitment.

Mr. Obama has little influence with the Republicans he needs to make policy gains, and his sliding poll numbers figure to only weaken his hold.

But it is difficult for Mr. Obama to work in bipartisan fashion because of GOP animosity toward him, some policy activists said.

Critics Ask Why France Scuttled Iran Nuclear Deal

Maybe Hollande's just not quite ready to throw Israel under the bus?

At LAT, "France's role in scuttling Iran nuclear deal prompts speculation":

WASHINGTON — France's role in the unraveling of an international deal to curb Iran's nuclear program brought angry reactions Sunday from Tehran, glowing praise from Iran's detractors and a whirl of speculation about what the French motive might be.

A marathon round of international talks in Geneva fell short of a widely anticipated deal early Sunday after French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius objected, saying the terms of a preliminary accord were too easy on Tehran. Many nations fear Iran has been secretly seeking a nuclear weapons capability, despite its claims to want nuclear power only for energy and medical purposes.

Fabius broke an informal rule of the six-nation diplomatic group that has been negotiating with the Iranians by going public with his criticism of the preliminary deal, which was aimed at opening the way for comprehensive negotiations over the nuclear program.

"One wants a deal … but not a sucker's deal," Fabius said.

When the negotiations ground to a temporary halt, Iran was quick to point a finger.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani told the National Assembly that Tehran would not be intimidated by any country's "sanctions, threats, contempt and discrimination," according to Iran's student news service. "For us there are red lines that cannot be crossed."

The semiofficial Fars news agency criticized the "destructive roles of France and Israel" for the failure of negotiators to reach an interim deal and ran a caricature of France as a frog firing a gun. "By shooting he feels he is important," the commentary said.

In contrast, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) tweeted that France "had the courage to prevent a bad nuclear agreement with Iran. Vive la France!"

The halt in talks set off a debate on whether France's intervention was motivated by commercial or geopolitical interests in the Middle East.

Good for France. Sheesh, doesn't anyone understand that Iran's up to no good?

More at that top link.

Radical Left Rejects Rational Ideas That Make the World Go 'Round

From the letters to the editor, at the New York Times, "Role of Humanities, in School and Life":

The humanities professors who spoke out on the causes of declined student enrollment did not mention a major factor that’s reshaped humanities education since 1970, when the decline began: postmodernism.

In the 1990s, when I was an English major at the University of Michigan, postmodernists dominated humanities study, and in their zeal to critique “Western culture,” they pointedly spurned old Enlightenment notions of “the classics,” “science,” “reason” and even “knowledge” itself — categories that they quarantined in dubious scare quotes as if they were hazardous materials. I fled my passion, literature, for a practical and rational-minded career in medicine.

While the professors justifiably cite inadequate funding and marketplace demand for scientists and engineers as causes of the marginalization of the humanities, they also ought to look inward at their profession’s rejection of the rational ideals that make the educated world go round.

AUSTIN RATNER
Brooklyn, Oct. 31, 2013

The writer is the author of two novels and a physiology textbook.

Yes. Indeed. That might be worth pointing out, that the radical left has destroyed decency and rationalism in American life. It can't be said enough, so don't stop saying it. Shout it from the rooftops: THE RADICAL LEFT IS DESTROYING ALL THAT'S GOOD IN THE UNITED STATES!!

PREVIOUSLY: "Ethnic Studies Programs Crash and Burn at Cal State University."

Obama 'Deeply Saddened' by Typhoon Haiyan Devastation

At London's Daily Mail, "Obama 'deeply saddened' by Typhoon Haiyan devastation as US marines go to Philippines to assist in relief efforts after thousands killed."



IMAGE CREDIT: iOWNTHEWORLD.

Robbie Williams: 'Mack the Knife'

Via Ghost of a Flea.

Oh the shark babe has such teeth, dear
And he shows them pearly white
Just a jack knife has ol’ MacHeath, babe
And he keeps it out of sight

You know when that shark bites with his teeth, dear
Scarlet billows start to spread
Fancy gloves though wears ol’ MacHeath, babe
So there's never, never a trace of red

On the sidewalk, Oh Sunday morning don’t you know
Lies a body just oozing life
And Someone's sneaking around the corner
Could that be our boy Mack the knife?

From a tug boat down by the river don’t you know
Lays a cement bag just dropping on down
That’s cement's there, it’s there for the weight, dear
I’ll get you ten ol’ Macky is back in town

Did you hear bout Louie Miller? He disappeared, babe
After drawing out all his hard earned cash
And know MacHeath spends, he spends just like a, like a sailor
Could it be, could it be, could it be, our boy did something rash?

[2x]
Jenny Diver Oh Sukey Tawdry
Look out Miss Polly Peachum and Oh Lucy Brown
Yeah the line forms on the right, babe
Now that Macky is back in town

Camus and Sartre Friendship Troubled by Ideological Feud

At Der Spiegel, "Philosophical Differences: The Falling-Out of Camus and Sartre":

Albert Camus and Jean-Paul Sartre, two of the most important minds of the 20th century, were closely entwined throughout their careers. On the centenary of Camus' birth, SPIEGEL looks back at their famous friendship and the ideological feud that ultimately unraveled it.

What is a famous man? Albert Camus wrote in his diary in 1946 that it was "someone whose first name doesn't matter." That certainly applies to Camus, who would have celebrated his 100th birthday on Nov. 7, and it can also be said of his great adversary Jean-Paul Sartre, who was eight years older than him, yet outlived him by 20 years.

Camus and Sartre were the intellectual stars of Paris during the postwar years: the existentialists, the Mandarins and the literary vanguard. They became iconic figures of the ideological conflicts of the second half of the 20th century. Their rivalry shaped intellectual debates in France and around the world.

Camus and Sartre's falling-out in the summer of 1952, which was played out in full view of the public, was a signal, a political watershed. The rupture, in the midst of the Cold War, split the camps. For decades, people would say: Sartre or Camus? Should we hope for a better world in the distant future at the price of accepting state terror? The revolutionary mass politics espoused by Sartre in the name of Marxism would seem to contain this tradeoff. Or should we refuse to sacrifice people for an ideal, as Camus' humanist principles required?

Camus and Sartre basically stood in each other's way right from the beginning. They were both storytellers, playwrights and essayists, literature and theater critics, philosophers and editors in chief. They had the same publisher. They both were awarded the Nobel Prize for literature. Camus felt overwhelming gratitude when he accepted his award in 1957. Sartre loftily declined the designation in 1964 - making sure to underscore that he was not insulted "because Camus had received it before me," as he said at the time.

The Company of Women

And there was another -- at first glance unremarkable -- commonality. Both preferred the company of women to that of men. "Why women?" Camus wondered in his diary in 1951. His answer: "I cannot stand the company of men. They flatter or they judge. I can stand neither of the two." Back in 1940, Sartre used nearly the same choice of words in his diary when noting that he "gets horribly bored in the company of men," yet "it's very rare for the company of women not to entertain me."

They were long seen as friends and allies. But Camus could not hide that he felt a growing sense of distance from the clique of Parisian intellectuals surrounding Sartre and his companion, Simone de Beauvoir. No matter how much he debated with the others, and spent long nights drinking, dancing and seducing, he remained the wistful loner.

Sartre was envious of the idolized and good-looking French Algerian, the "street urchin from Algiers," as he later called him. Sartre saw himself as a child of the French bourgeoisie -- and he strove to break its bonds as demonstratively as possible. By contrast, Camus was proud of his humble origins and never denied his roots.

The two ambitious men met personally for the first time in the midst of the war, in occupied Paris during the summer of 1943. Camus introduced himself on the occasion of the premiere of Sartre's play "The Flies." At the time, a small group of artists and philosophers met regularly in private homes and in the cafés of Saint-Germain-des-Prés in the heart of Paris. But rivalries soon surfaced, long before the public was privy to any intellectual competition. The conflict, no surprise, often had to do with women.

Sartre once asked himself if he didn't seek out women's company "to free myself from the burden of my ugliness." In early 1944, he wrote a letter to his lifelong companion de Beauvoir, informing her of his victory over ladies' man Camus. It had to do with a certain Tania, whose sister put in a good word for him: "What are you thinking, running after Camus? What do you want from him?" he'd had the sister tell her. He, Sartre, was so much better, she'd said, and such a nice man.

Continue reading.

Video c/o The Libertarian.

Time-Lapse Video of Navy Aircraft Carrier Gerald Ford

The video's from WSJ, and at Wikipedia, "USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78)":

PCU [Pre-commissioning Unit] Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) is to be the lead ship of its class of United States Navy supercarriers. As announced by the U.S. Navy on 16 January 2007, the ship is named after the 38th President of the United States Gerald R. Ford, whose World War II naval service included combat duty aboard the light aircraft carrier Monterey in the Pacific Theater.

The keel of Gerald R. Ford was laid down on 13 November 2009.[2] Construction began on 11 August 2005, when Northrop Grumman held a ceremonial steel cut for a 15-ton plate that will form part of a side shell unit of the carrier. It was christened on 9 November 2013. The schedule calls for the ship to join the U.S. Navy’s fleet in 2016. Gerald R. Ford will enter the fleet replacing the inactive USS Enterprise (CVN-65), which ended its 51 years of active service in December 2012.

More at that top link.

RELATED: Marty Erdossy, Captain, US Navy (Retired), at Forbes, "Why Does the United States Only Have Eleven Aircraft Carriers?"

Looting Hits Phillippines Amid Widespread Damage from Supertyphoon Haiyan

At the Wall Street Journal, "Looting on Storm-Hit Island Prompts Calls for Martial Law."

Also, "Philippines Left Reeling in Wake of Storm":

ORMOC CITY, Philippines—Supertyphoon Haiyan left a central region of the Philippines in tatters, as authorities struggled to verify the number of dead and looting began in one of the hardest-hit cities.

In the coastal city of Tacloban, people ransacked shops, while food and medical stations were swamped by those in need. Rescue workers dug through rubble and mud in search of survivors.

President Benigno Aquino III said the city would be placed under a state of emergency to allow the central government to speed up relief and reconstruction efforts.

The typhoon, known locally as Yolanda, hit the Philippines on Friday, with fierce winds and heavy rains shredding homes, uprooting trees and flinging cars and boats.

The storm weakened as it made landfall in northeastern Vietnam early Monday, causing widespread power outages and triggering heavy rains that authorities feared may cause floods and landslides. Haiyan was expected to move inland toward the border with China.

Mr. Aquino said late Sunday the government was trying to verify the number of dead. The official toll stood at 229 but was expected to climb substantially.

The Philippine National Red Cross said the death toll could run into the thousands, adding that it was difficult to calculate the figure because the storm left bodies scattered over wide areas.

Continue reading.

Greenpeace Rainbow Warrior, Floating Hub for Radical Activism, Docks in San Francisco

At the San Francisco Chronicle, "Greenpeace's 'hippie ship' stops by S.F.'s waterfront."

Actually, these people, in Russia, have erred badly in challenging the power of the state.

At the Los Angeles Times, "Activist sits in Russian jail; family waits, worries":

The irony is cruel for Lara Litvinov. Nearly half a century ago, she and her brother, Dima Litvinov — children in a family with a long history of civil disobedience — were living in exile with their parents in Siberia. When the family emigrated from the country in 1974, they believed they had left Russian oppression behind.

Now, Dima sits in a Russian jail along with the nearly 30 other Greenpeace activists for protesting oil drilling operations in the Arctic. He has become the third generation in his family to be imprisoned in Russia.

"I didn't expect this in my life again," said his father, Pavel Litvinov, 73, who was banished to Siberia for protesting the Soviet Union's 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia. "When I took Dima and Dima, 51, has been a Greenpeace activist for nearly 25 years. "He wanted to make a difference in the world," Lara said in an interview at her home in Torrance. "Money was never important to him. He was just interested in doing what is right."

In September, Dima and other Greenpeace activists attempted to stage a demonstration against what is said to be the world's first ice-resistant oil platform. Russian authorities acted swiftly, arresting them — and two journalists — as charges are investigated.

The family is trying to stay optimistic, but Lara is scared. She has seen photographs of her brother in handcuffs and in a courtroom, standing inside a metal cage. She hears he's being kept in a 12- by 24-foot cell for 23 hours a day with only an hour outside. It's cold, and it's dark.

"There is so much that is unknown, and the Russian government is so unpredictable," she said. out of Russia, I thought I had taken them away from that country so that this could never happen."

Charged first with piracy and then with hooliganism, Dima faces the possibility of years in prison with a substantial fine...

Continue reading.

Sunday Cartoons

At Flopping Aces, "Sunday Funnies."



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

And at American Perspectives, "Just Who Exactly Wrote Obamacare Anyway." And 90 Miles From Tyranny, "April Fools Day Came Early This Year..."

CARTOON CREDIT: William Warren.

#ObamaCare in California: 65% Say People Won't Be Able to Afford Insurance

Look, Obama took California by nearly 60 percent of the vote in 2012. If the law's not going over well here in blue state heaven, Democrats are sucking donkey balls. Big freakin' balls!

The Un-Affordable Care Act.

At the Los Angeles Times, "Californians have their doubts about healthcare law":

Cutting across partisan and racial lines, Californians as a whole were skeptical that the Affordable Care Act would live up to its name.

Sixty-five percent of respondents said people wouldn't be able to afford the health insurance they'll be required to have under the law's individual mandate. Forty percent think the program will have a negative effect on what they pay for coverage, compared with 21% who expect a positive outcome.

According to the survey, 46% of registered voters expect the Affordable Care Act to be a drag on the overall economy and 34% see an economic boost. Nearly 60% think the law's new requirements will raise healthcare costs and keep businesses from hiring more workers.

The poll was taken just as the national healthcare rollout was coming under intense criticism in Congress, even from some Democrats. Obama has apologized for the malfunctioning healthcare.gov enrollment website and for millions of Americans receiving cancellation notices because their current coverage doesn't meet all the requirements of the healthcare law.

Those consumers have directed much of their anger at Obama's repeated pledge that Americans could keep their existing insurance if they liked it.

California is running its own insurance exchange, as are 13 other states, and its online enrollment hasn't experienced nearly as many problems as the federal marketplace for 36 states. But the sticker shock from higher premiums and concerns about losing access to preferred doctors and hospitals have taken a toll.

"California has had a pretty good rollout on its exchange compared to the national one, but people here are still feeling the negative repercussions of higher costs and lost policies," said David Kanevsky of American Viewpoint, the Republican firm that helped conduct the poll for the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences and The Times.

The poll was conducted jointly by American Viewpoint and Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, a Democratic polling firm in Washington. They surveyed 1,503 registered state voters by telephone Oct. 30-Nov. 5. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, and larger for subgroups.

For Obama and his signature law, much depends on Californians embracing the changes. California wants to enroll more than 2 million people by the end of next year in subsidized health insurance or an expansion of Medi-Cal, the state's Medicaid program for the poor.

Poll respondents said they were upbeat about the law's potential to help many of the state's 7 million uninsured. Sixty-five percent expect there will be fewer people without coverage and 67% think patients will get more access to checkups and other preventive care.

"Fundamentally, Californians are viewing the Affordable Care Act as a mixed bag," said Drew Lieberman of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner. "They harbor real concerns about the potential negative impact on costs and the economy."

Diana Sackett, 61, a software engineer in Pleasanton, has many of those worries even though she strongly supports the president's healthcare plan. She has battled cancer in the past and knows the value of quality health coverage. "In an advanced country like ours, everyone should be able to get the healthcare they need," Sackett said.

But she isn't optimistic that the healthcare law will stem the rising costs of medical care and fears it may even get worse with an influx of newly insured patients.

"I'm concerned it won't really address the cost problems," said Sackett, who pays for health insurance through her employer. "I think healthcare is still going to be pretty expensive."

According to the poll, the changes are being implemented at a time when voters are generally satisfied with their own healthcare. Ninety percent of respondents said they were happy with the quality of their medical care and access to their doctors.

The state's health insurance exchange, Covered California, also faces deep skepticism among its core audience.

Even uninsured Californians, who stand to benefit the most from the changes, were split. Forty-eight percent favored the law while 45% were against.

Individuals who now purchase their own policies were more negative. Forty-nine percent were opposed to the law and 44% said they were in favor.

It's not good.

Forty-percent expect the law to have a negative effect on their health insurance payments, and just 21 percent expect a positive result.

Forty-six percent of registered voters expect the law to pull down economic growth, with only 34 percent expecting an economic boost. And less than half of uninsured Californians favor ObamaCare, a number likely to go down the longer the administration's botched rollout continues.

Another day and more bad news for the Democrats. And I'll tell you, I'm all torn up over this. It's just horrible --- HORRIBLE!!!

IMAGE CREDIT: Heritage Foundation.

BONUS: At the San Jose Mercury News, "Obamacare's winners and losers in Bay Area."

Casting the 2013 Victoria's Secret Fashion Show

The show's coming up one month from today!

Secretary of State John Kerry Has 'Doubts' Lee Harvey Oswald Acted Alone in Assassination of President John F. Kennedy

How bloody stupid.

This reminds of 22 years ago and the wild conspiracies of Oliver Stone's "JFK."

I swear leftists are the freakin' worst conspiracy theorists. And John Kerry's a flaming ghoul.

At CNN, "Kerry doubts Warren Commission report." (Via Memeorandum.)

He's clamming up now, the asshole, "Kerry won't talk about Kennedy conspiracy" (at Memeorandum).

And for a reminder, Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. There is no conspiracy except in the minds of radical leftists. See Gerald Posner's book, Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK.

Fresno State Moves to #16 in AP's Top 25 College Football Rankings

And they're doing even better in USA Today's poll of coaches.

At the Fresno Bee, "Fresno State up to No. 14 in USA Today Coaches poll":

.@lamblock Turns out I've been sending my kid to school w/ a gang symbol t-shirt! #FresnoState #Bulldogs pic.twitter.com/jKzkOZTQIc
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) November 10, 2013

Fresno State moved to No. 14 in the new USA Today Coaches Top 25 football poll Sunday, a leap of three spots in one of the components that determine berths in the big-money postseason games of the BCS.

Louisville of the American Athletic Conference remained one spot ahead of the Bulldogs, with the full BCS standings due out later Sunday.

Northern Illinois, another would-be BCS buster along with the Bulldogs, fell one spot among the coaches to No. 21 while on a bye week.

Fresno State is guaranteed a berth in one of the BCS games if it remains ranked at least No. 16, is the highest from a non-automatic-qualifying conference, and ahead of a champion from an AQ conference such as the AAC.

Last week's BCS standings had the Bulldogs 16th with a .3675 average, ahead of key BCS rivals in No. 18 Northern Illinois (.3169), No. 20 Louisville (.2510) and No. 21 Central Florida (.2151).

The Bulldogs are No. 16 in the latest Associated Press Top 25, a day after they improved to 9-0 with a 48-10 victory at Wyoming.

I watched last night's game at Wyoming. It was a 48-10 blowout. See, "Fresno State football: Bulldogs skip field goal, go for glory," and "Fresno State Postgame Wrap: No. 17 Bulldogs 48, Wyoming 10."

And at the tweet above, I'm thinking perhaps my 6th-grader should retire his Fresno State Bulldogs t-shirt he's been wearing to school this semester. We don't have a big gang presence in Irvine, but sheesh, you never can be too careful these days. See, "Fresno State's Fearsome Bulldog Mascot Is Street Gang Symbol."

Chris Christie: Time Magazine's Savior for the 2016 GOP

Here's Moe Lane on Time's fat-shaming cover story, "Time Magazine attempts to fat-shame Chris Christie*."

*Hey. This is the Left’s own sensitivity rulebook. One that they expect us to follow even though they happily abandon it the second that they can go after a conservative. You have to make them live up to their own rules, which they don’t want to do and will avoid whenever possible.

I get the magazine in hard copy, and I'm more perplexed by this meme of Christie as the GOP's 2016 savior:

New Jersey voters never got to hear Chris Christie's most important speech this year, because it took place behind closed doors at a Westin hotel in Boston, where the governor laid out his not so veiled pitch for the party's 2016 nomination. "I'm in this business to win," he told the crowd of Republican leaders, according to an audio recording smuggled out of the room. "I don't know why you're in it."

It was pure Christie, combat bundled in cliche. Ever since he ousted Democratic incumbent Jon Corzine in 2009, he has run the Garden State with combustible passion, blunt talk and the kind of bipartisan dealmaking that no one seems to do anymore. He doesn't claim to be an ideas man or a visionary. He's a workhorse with a temper and a tongue, the guy who loves his mother and gets it done.

All year long, Christie has presented this character he has created as the savior for the Grand Old Party. At the Boston meeting in August, he said ideologues had begun to edge out the winners in Ronald Reagan's Big Tent. (He meant you, Tea Party, Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin.) They acted like college professors, just spouting ideas. "College professors are fine, I guess," he joked, before driving it home. "If we don't win, we don't govern. And if we don't govern, all we do is shout into the wind."

Christie then went out and won, and he won big. In a blue state, he got 61% of the vote for governor on Nov. 5. "If we can do this in Trenton, New Jersey," Christie thundered, "maybe the folks in Washington, D.C., should tune in their TVs right now, see how it's done."

It's awful early to be anointing the GOP frontrunner, and I cringe at the thought of yet another doomed Republican presidential campaign in 2016. The GOP will be crushed if they keep nominating these mealy-mouthed moderates. Damn. I checked with Dan Riehl on Twitter the other night, after I finished reading the cover story. Christie's not very conservative at all:

@AmPowerBlog his rhetoric is that of a progressive. Not libertarian on social issues, not very conservative on fiscal issues. what's 2 like?

— DanRiehl (@DanRiehl) November 10, 2013

The country's ready for conservative leadership in the Ronald Reagan mold. Obviously, Chris Christie's not it. Although, sadly, the JournoList media will be all too happy to foist him off on a hoodwinked electorate. Grassroots conservatives will have their job cut out keeping that from happening.

Happy 238th Birthday to the U.S. Marine Corps

At the Daily Caller, "Happy 238th Birthday Marines: A message From the Commandant of the Marine Corps":

For 238 years, The United States Marine Corps has proudly served our great Nation with unfailing valor – bolstered by the enduring fortitude of our fellow Marines, our families, and our friends. This is why each year on November 10th, Marines from all generations gather together, in groups large and small, to celebrate the birthday of our Corps and to reflect on the proud legacy and warrior ethos we share. This is what unites us as Marines. From our first battle at New Providence to today in Afghanistan, Marines have always shown that they were made of tougher stuff – that when the enemy’s fire poured in from all angles, and the situation was grim, Marines unequivocally knew that their fellow Marines would stay behind their guns, fight courageously, and drive the enemy from the battlefield. We have always known hardship, fatigue, and pain…but we have never known what it is to lose a battle!

Continue reading.

The Best Blogs Now and Some Smokin' Holly Eriksson

Ima try'n get some Rule 5 posted today. My mom visited yesterday and I'm grading semester writing projects, so my weekend blogging's been thrown off. Hopefully I can get the full babe-blogging roundup posted in a little bit.

Meanwhile, Gator Doug rounds up some of the hottest blogs happening right now, "The 25 Best Blogs Now."

That's a roundup of culture warriors, and I'm honored to be included at the list.

I'll have more of my brand blogging throughout the day and beyond.

Meanwhile, Holly Eriksson's here to help celebrate, at Egotastic!, "Holly Eriksson Topless Calendar Sneak Peek Will Fill Your Days With Smiles."



Photo via Twitter.

Name and Shame: 100 Leftist Celebrities Who've Made Millions and Billions Off the Free-Enterprise System

This is great.

Because you know leftists don't really believe their own ideological bullshit.

At Independent Journal Review, "Wall of Shame: Net Worths of 100 Left-Wing Millionaire and Billionaire Celebs":

These 100 left-wing supporters of wealth redistribution made millions and even billions off the free enterprise system. Many supported the Celebrity President himself Barack Obama, who has ironically gotten quite wealthy preaching against ‘evil’ rich people. This is just a taste of left-wing hypocrisy.

See photos of the Hypocrite 100 at the link (via Instapundit).

At Least 10,00 Feared Dead in Philippines Typhoon

At LAT, "Typhoon may have killed nearly 10,000 in Philippines."

At at WSJ, "Thousands Feared Dead in the Philippines in Wake of Typhoon: Red Cross and Authorities Fear Toll Could Rise to the Thousands":

MANILA—The Philippine National Red Cross said Sunday that the death toll from supertyphoon Haiyan could run into the thousands, adding that it is difficult to perform the grim calculations because the massive storm left bodies scattered over wide areas.

Photographs and video taken Sunday in Tacloban—a city especially hard hit—showed dead people being pulled from rubble and mud, cars and boats tossed into piles and homes shredded.

"This is a monumental disaster. As of now, there's no time to count the bodies. The dead bodies are not in one place like what happened in Ormoc," Richard Gordon, chairman of the Philippine Red Cross, told The Wall Street Journal.

Mr. Gordon, a former senator, was referring to the 1991 flash floods caused by a typhoon in Ormoc City on the island of Leyte which claimed more than 5,000 lives—the most on record caused by a storm in the Philippines.

Health Assistant Secretary Eric Tayag, who was with a medical team deployed to set up three mobile hospitals in Tacloban, said the government is considering digging a mass grave to bury the dead there.

The National Disaster and Risk Reduction Management Council said the typhoon has affected more than 4.5 million people in the 36 provinces in the central Philippines and in the southern part of the main island of Luzon. It said more than 477,000 people were displaced by Haiyan and 400,000 of them are in evacuation centers.

Haiyan, locally known as Yolanda, pounded three dozen provinces in the central Philippines and the southern section of the main island of Luzon with gale-force winds that stirred five-yard-high storm surges that flooded coastal towns.