Abortion Barbie Goes There

See Ed Morrissey, at Hot Air, "The worst campaign ad ever?":

It’s simply stunning in its sheer desperation. It’s so bad that I’m writing this post at nearly 11 pm in Rome to make sure it goes up on the site tonight. This isn’t just a bad campaign ad — it may very well be the worst, most cynical campaign ad ever. And the award goes to Wendy Davis, who’s about to get trounced by Greg Abbott, and this shows why:

After getting justice for himself, Greg Abbott spent his career denying that same justice to other victims. WATCH: http://t.co/KpuBJdU5fa

— Wendy Davis (@WendyDavisTexas) October 10, 2014

RTWT.

And don't miss Twitchy, "‘Eff it, let’s go after the cripple’: You have to see Wendy Davis’ new attack ad [video]." Be sure to follow the links for additional posts.

A perfect representation of Democrat Party depravity. So, when will top party officials and office holders denounce Wendy Davis and her abject hatred for the disabled? I'm not holding my breath. This is a feature, not a bug.

Rosie Jones Returns to Zoo

Well, she's making the most of her modeling career, and good for her. The U.K.'s totalitarian feminists already succeeded in getting Nuts shut down. More power to Zoo.



PREVIOUSLY: "Rosie Jones' First-Ever Zoo 'Shoot."

News Generation Gap

A rhetorical question, via Nieman Lab:

Is there a news generation gap? http://t.co/xx5PaRTVhD pic.twitter.com/Ce9t5f5xVu

— Nieman Lab (@NiemanLab) October 9, 2014

Of course there's a news gap. I'm frankly surprised young people read news websites at all.

Here's the Left’s Secret Plan to Turn America Into Sweden

From James Pethokoukis, at AEI.

The Republican Party Remains the Natural Repository of the Values Espoused by Abraham Lincoln

From Richard Brookhiser, at the Wall Street Journal, "Freedom, Hard Work and the Party of Lincoln":

Every February, local Republican parties celebrate Lincoln’s birthday, complete with costumed re-enactors reciting the Gettysburg Address. It is one of the charming rituals of American politics, half playful, half earnest and all homemade.

Better than dressing up like Lincoln is thinking seriously about his ideas. Much of Lincoln’s career was consumed by issues that—thanks largely to him—are long gone: We will never again argue about slavery in Kansas. But his principles are forever relevant: his love of freedom; his belief in work as the means of self-fulfillment; his devotion to America’s founders and their great documents. The Republican Party, which he helped found and which backed him loyally through the Civil War, is the natural repository of his legacy.

Lincoln’s greatest achievement, along with preserving the Union, was extinguishing American slavery. He won the presidency in 1860 on a pledge to stop slavery from expanding into new territories; in January 1863 the Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves of rebels; the 13th Amendment, approved by Congress in January 1865 with his support, abolished slavery nationwide. As a result of his efforts four million bondmen and -women were freed.

But Lincoln believed in freedom as a universal right, “applicable,” as he put it in 1859, “to all men and all times.” Lincoln thought liberty and tyranny were locked in an age-old struggle. He repeatedly linked slavery to older forms of despotism. “A king who seeks to bestride the people of his own nation,” he said in his 1858 debates with Stephen Douglas, was animated by “the same tyrannical principle” as “one race of men . . . enslaving another race.” But Lincoln’s comparison applies equally to the modern metastasized state.

Lincoln understood the necessary limits of democratic government: The people could become their own oppressors if they endorsed tyranny. If a “man governs himself that is self-government,” he said in 1854, “but when he governs himself, and also governs another man, that is more than self-government—that is despotism.”

Lincoln’s faith in freedom was bound up with his views on work. Lincoln rose from frontier subsistence farming to the professional middle class by his own efforts. As a teenager he resented his father, Thomas Lincoln, for hiring him out as an unpaid laborer, as if he were a horse or a plow. As a young adult he tried a variety of jobs to support himself, from blacksmithing to surveying, until he finally taught himself the law. Lawyers could make good money in early-19th-century America, but it was never easy. Twice a year Lincoln traveled Illinois’ 8th judicial circuit (approximately the size of Connecticut) to earn fees from criminal cases and small claims. He also argued for railroads, the big businesses of the day....

Lincoln claimed to be preserving the Founders’ handiwork. Their principles were his; his solutions fulfilled their aims. In the Gettysburg Address, he called, not for a birth of new freedom, but “a new birth of freedom”—the Founders’ freedom, cleansed by removing the stain of slavery. For Lincoln the road to America’s future always began in its past...

RTWT.

Brianna Wu Goes Into Hiding — #GamerGate

Remember from last month, "FEMINIST BULLIES TEARING THE VIDEO GAME INDUSTRY APART."

It's Milo Yiannopoulos, and I agree with his commentary, for the most part. And then I see stuff like this and don't know what to think.

Can't keep up with everything:

8chan/#gamergate just doxxed me, posting all kinds of personal information about me. Guys, THIS is the war on industry women. Wake up.

— Brianna Wu (@Spacekatgal) October 11, 2014

And, here's the part of the night where I call the police. pic.twitter.com/uMByxBEtYz

— Brianna Wu (@Spacekatgal) October 11, 2014

The police just came by. Husband and I are going somewhere safe. Remember, #gamergate isn't about attacking women. pic.twitter.com/ZU6oEVxMGL

— Brianna Wu (@Spacekatgal) October 11, 2014

RELATED: FWIW, from Laurie Penney, "WHY WE’RE WINNING: SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIORS AND THE NEW CULTURE WAR."

And then back to Yiannopoulos, "HOW TO LOSE A PUBLIC RELATIONS BATTLE ON THE INTERNET."

Maybe Robert Stacy McCain can figure it out?!!

Bwahaha!! Jimmy Carter Relinquishes Title of Worst President Ever!

To Barack Hussein Obumbler, lol.

PAST PRESIDENT JIMMY CARTER HANDS OVER HIS TROPHY 2 PRESIDENT OBAMA!! #tcot #ccot #pjnet pic.twitter.com/WqvDpk95F8

— DR. TWEET, Ph.D. (@Callisto1947) October 11, 2014

More at the Other McCain, "Obama’s Failed Presidency."

Charles Krauthammer: Obama's Sad Approval Numbers Drag Down the Democrats

From the one and only Krauthammer:

Fifty-Two Percent of Americans Say Republicans Will Win Control of the Senate

Yeah, well, it's not looking to good for the Ebola Democrats.

At Gallup, "Slim Majority in U.S. Expect Republicans to Win the Senate":

Partisans on both sides show signs of wishful thinking when assessing which party will win control of the U.S. House and Senate this fall. Nearly two-thirds of Democrats interviewed in the Sept. 25-30 survey say their own party will win the Senate -- not an unreasonable conjecture given that Democrats currently control the upper chamber and would need to lose a net of six seats to lose the majority. But the slight majority of Democrats, 51%, also believe their party will win in the House -- an outcome out of step with the Republican gains most pundits are expecting.

Likewise, despite the closeness of several races that Republicans must win if they are to gain control of the Senate, the vast majority of Republicans, 76%, are optimistic the Republicans will take the U.S. Senate. Meanwhile, 87% of Republicans believe the Republican Party will control of the House, possibly reflecting their awareness that their party already has a firm hold on it.

The more objective predictions may be those made by political independents, which mirror the national averages. More than half of independents predict Republicans will win the Senate, and a solid majority -- 61% -- say Republicans will win the House.

Democrats Prepare for World Without Obama

Outstanding analysis, from Jonathan Tobin, at Commentary, "Dems Prepare for World Without Obama":

A world without Obama is terra incognita for a Democratic Party that must prove it can win a victory without the aid of a boogeyman like George W. Bush or a hope-and-change messiah. Moreover, eight years of a largely failed presidency has altered the political landscape just as much as the changing demographics. Next month we will get the first indication whether Democrats are equipped to deal with that dilemma. If the polls that currently give the GOP an edge are any indication, they might not like the answer.

Heh, "hope-and-change messiah."

Ain't it the truth.

The Left Looks to Legalize Incest Between Consenting Adults

Heh, the next frontier in equality.

Shoot, let siblings get married. Why should your bigotry hinder other people's happiness? Indeed, hey, as long as it doesn't harm your marriage, what's to object?!!

At Truth Revolt, "HuffPo Gay Voices Asks 'Should Incest Between Consenting Adults Be Legalized?'"

RELATED: From David Harsanyi, at the Federalist, "I’m asking on what logical grounds can a person argue that gay marriage is okay but polygamy is not—or any other type of marriage?"

Malala Yousafzai Wins Nobel Peace Prize

Well, ahem, at least they picked someone who actually deserves it.

At the New York Times, "Nobel Peace Prize Goes to Children’s Rights Activists."

Voter Engagement Lower Than in 2010 and 2006 Midterms

It's gonna hurt the Dems.

At Gallup:

Usually, Republicans vote at higher rates than Democrats, and this is evident in higher scores for Republicans than for Democrats on the voter engagement questions, including this year. In fact, the Republican advantages on each of the three turnout measures at this point approach what Gallup measured in the strong GOP year of 2010 rather than in other midterm election years. As a result, even if overall turnout is depressed compared with prior years, Republicans appear poised to turn out in greater numbers than Democrats.

But be sure to RTWT.

2014's going to be different than previous elections, because voters don't expect polarization and government gridlock to end.

Fine by me. As long as the GOP shuts down the Obama-Dems, I'll be happy for a couple more years. Besides, I doubt 2016 will be a good year for the Democrats --- especially in foreign policy --- so Republicans can ride the 2014 momentum into the presidential election year. As the idiot Markos Moulitsas likes to say, crush 'em.

ICYMI, Don't Forget William Voegeli, 'The Pity Party: A Mean-Spirited Diatribe Against Liberal Compassion'

It's a good book.

Pre-order at Amazon.

Hold Obama and the Democrats Accountable for the Terrorist Threat

From David Horowitz, at FrontPage Mag:

Since 1945 Republicans have not won the popular vote unless national security was the primary issue. But security issues were virtually absent from the 2008 and 2012 elections. This gave victories to Barack Obama, the most anti-military president in American history. Fortunately, the prospects for 2016 are looking marginally better because Republicans are now actually focusing on the fact that an anti-military presidency has ominous consequences for the 300 million Americans whose safety is the primary responsibility of the commander-in-chief.

That said, there is much to be desired in the Republican message, which is tepid, diffuse and easily missed. When Politico wrote a story about the recent change in Republican strategy it was all about the shift away from the tax-cutting emphasis of recent years, rather than towards the national security issue.

So let me describe the reality we are actually facing, which is a necessary preface to the way the Republican Party should be framing its strategy and should be emphasizing the dangers of having a Democratic president like Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton – or for that matter a Democratic Congress – leading us in wartime.

I will leave out of this wartime equation the threats from Russia and China, which Obama and the Democrats have done so much to foster. I will focus only on the threat posed by Islamic jihadists, who at this moment can easily penetrate the borders that Obama and the Democrats have done so much to wreck. And carry with them chemical and biological weapons, and – if Iran builds the bombs which Obama the Democrats have made almost inevitable – nuclear weapons as well.

This is easily the greatest terrorist threat in our history, far greater than what transpired before and after 9/11. ISIS, al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas and other Islamic terrorist armies now control territory (and attendant resources) from Afghanistan through Iraq Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Mali, Somalia and other regions of Africa, Asia and the Middle East.

Why has this happened? Because Obama and the Democrats have waged a ten-year war against the war on terror, against American military strength, against an American presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, and against the very idea that Islamic forces have declared war on us. For ten years Democrats have been determined to treat terrorists as individual criminals, arrest them and try them in American courts where they will have all the protections of the American legal system that they are seeking to destroy. So hostile has Obama been to the very notion of a “War on Terror” that he has purged the very term from the official government vocabulary and replaced it with “overseas contingency operations” which describes exactly nothing.

To create the power vacuum which Islamic jihadists have filled, Obama had to defy the advice of his Secretary of Defense and his intelligence advisers. He did this in part by absenting himself from nearly half his daily intelligence briefings, and in part by saying no to absolutely crucial measures that his military staff proposed for countering the threat from ISIS and other terrorist groups. Obama saw to it that America would relinquish its military base in Iraq (a country that strategically borders on Afghanistan, Syria and Iran) or to keep the 20,000 American troops stationed there as his Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff urged him to do.

Obama hated the Iraq War so much that he was willing to betray all the American soldiers who gave their lives to keep Iraq out of the clutches of Iran and safe from the terrorist threat. If Obama had just listened to the advice of his military staff, there would be no ISIS today. Obama’s deliberate, calculated surrender of Iraq (and soon Afghanistan) and failure to stop Syria’s Assad when he crossed Obama’s red line is the greatest and gravest dereliction of duty in the history of the American presidency.

And make no mistake, Obama was not alone. For ten years the Democrats have been sabotaging the war on terror, beginning with their disgraceful scorched earth campaign against President Bush and the War in Iraq and continuing with their full-throated cry for the abandonment of Iraq after Bush had won the peace and contained the terrorist threat. Their support for Obama’s appeasement of Iran and Hamas, his support for the Muslim Brotherhood, and his diplomatic assault on Israel, America’s only true ally in the Middle East, is not only a national disgrace but the heart of the crisis that is looming on the international horizon.

If Republicans fail to articulate the sources of this crisis, and specifically to indict Obama, Hillary and the Democrats for their betrayal of America’s interests and their failure to protect the American people then Republicans electoral prospects will be dim, and with them, their country’s future.

Leftists Having Second Thoughts on 'Affirmative Consent' Laws

From KC Johnson, at Minding the Campus, "Liberals Begin to Doubt the New Anti-Rape Laws."

Blood Moon

At WSJ, "Photos: Total Eclipse of the MoonLunar Eclipse Brings ‘Blood Moon’ and Shadows to Asia, Americas."

Photos: A total lunar eclipse brings a ‘blood moon’ and shadows to the night's sky: http://t.co/9qSBVhoGwJ pic.twitter.com/GdlPrsNAXh
— WSJ Photos (@WSJphotos) October 8, 2014

Dodgers Failures Go Right to the Top

From Bill Plaschke, at the Los Angeles Times, "There's enough blame to go around for this Dodgers debacle":

From ownership on down, the Dodgers failed their fans and themselves...changes, big changes, are surely coming...

— Bill Plaschke (@BillPlaschke) October 8, 2014

For the 26th consecutive Dodgers season, the World Series won't be coming to town, and something needs to be said, and those words need to intially be about Walter and the ownership group, for this massive failure begins with them.

Guggenheim [Baseball Management] shamelessly hid the Dodgers from their fans this summer with a money grab from Time Warner Cable that prevented the team from being on television in 70% of Los Angeles households. Yet, for all the riches of that $8.35-billion contract, they refused to allow the trading of prospects for one simple arm that could have saved the Dodgers in October.

An effective starting pitcher would have prevented Kershaw from throwing Tuesday on three days' rest in a game in which he wearily gave up Matt Adams' three-run home run on his 102nd pitch.

An effective middle reliever would have allowed Manager Don Mattingly to relieve Kershaw not only before Adam's home run, but also before Matt Carpenter's three-run double sank Kershaw in the seventh inning of the series opener.

The team with the richest payroll in baseball history turned out to be a beautifully detailed Cadillac without any tires, a $240-million clunker that couldn't even finish the first October lap.

The failure continues with the baseball people, and that means General Manager Ned Colletti, who sat on a couch in the clubhouse early Friday evening and winced.

"It's always hard when you don't win,'' he said. "It tears me up.''

Colletti will take most of the heat here for failure to work within his bosses' philosophical constraints to somehow put together a group of decent relief pitchers. He is the one who rested the bullpen's future in the veteran arms of former All-Star closers Brian Wilson, Brandon League and Chris Perez, yet only two of the three even made the postseason roster, and neither Wilson nor League were trustworthy enough to use.

"It wasn't our bullpen that cost us this series," Colletti said. "Could they have been better? Sure, but when you have left-handed Cardinal hitters doing what they do, that's unreal.''

More.

Mia Farrow Waved a Greased Palm in Chevron Ecuador Case

At IBD:

Mia Farrow's Greased Palm http://t.co/RYATeawbG4 #tcot #tlot

— IBDeditorials (@IBDeditorials) October 7, 2014

Rackets: Celebrities have weighed in on lefty causes since Jane Fonda climbed atop the North Vietnamese gun. But new revelations about Mia Farrow dipping her palm in Ecuadoran oil — and cash — pretty well show what's going on.

It would probably be bearable to hear the vapid, views of Hollywood's finest if it were just a matter of stupid people issuing their opinions.

But when opinions become far-left activist causes and would not even be issued were it not for Third World dictatorship cash, then something else is going on.

Call it greased palms. The candidate for scrutiny who stands out, but isn't alone, is Mia Farrow, whose talent agency took $188,000 from the government of Ecuador, a supposedly neutral party in the dirtiest shakedown of a corporation ever attempted, the $9.5 billion lawsuit by activist NGOs against Chevron, over pollution in Ecuador it had nothing to do with.

Farrow took the cash and joined a celebrity cavalcade of supporters to dip her hands in what was probably Ecuadorean state company oil, waving them around and blaming Chevron for the spill on camera.

It was money well spent for the now-exposed plaintiffs, which forced Chevron to spend untold millions to defend itself against false charges that were subsequently thrown out by a U.S. judge as 100% fraudulent.

Farrow, on her Twitter feed, has insisted that she was just presenting her views and taking her speaking fees.

But she certainly didn't disclose the cash she took as performed her stunt, and it was only by Washington Free Beacon's digging and coverage by the New York Post this week that brought this act to light...

And don't miss Twitchy, "Mia Farrow under fire for role in defrauding Chevron of billions."

Dana Loesch Slams 'Douchebag' Critics of School Choice Decision

She's hilarious!

.@DLoesch makes a statement about homeschooling in an address to douchebags: http://t.co/wl0gKr4dum #DailyDana

— Dana (@DanaTheBlaze) October 8, 2014