'Saturday Night Live' Slams Obama Administration's Ebola Response

A thing of beauty. Freakin' comedic beauty.

It's a Hulu video, "Saturday Night Live - Cold Open: Ebola Czar."

'F-Bombs for Feminism' Shows the Radical Left Going Completely Off the Rails

I saw folks tweeting about this the other day but just now got around to watching it, and the people who put these little girls up for this ought to be in prison. It's that bad.

At Barracuda Brigade, "HORRENDOUSLY VILE ➡ Little Girls Unleash A Torrent of Profanity In ‘F-Bombs For Feminism’."

And Julie Borowski just destroys the losers who put this clip together. Leftist are both shameful and stupid.

Battleground Tracker: CBS News/New York Times Roundtable Discussion on 'Face the Nation'

A great panel. Folks here have pretty much convinced me that runoff elections in Georgia and Louisiana will decide who controls the Senate in 2015. Also interesting is Amy Walter's comments that in states like Colorado observers are using the results there to handicap the Electoral College vote in 2016. Republicans need to win back Colorado, which turned left with its support for Obama and the Democrats in 2008 and 2012.

Well, About That Chinese Naval Preponderance...

China's looking to upend U.S. strategic submarine dominance, as I wrote about the other day, "China's Nuclear Subs Alter the Global Strategic Balance."

As as well as that's going for Beijing, you can't field a true blue-water navy without an aircraft carrier fleet. And on that front, thing's aren't going so well for the Chinese.

See War is Boring, "China’s Aircraft Carrier Trouble—Spewing Steam and Losing Power."

Honestly, I doubt China's going to be overtaking U.S. global preponderance any time soon. And I'm glad.

Wildebeest Migration

Via Blazing Cat Fur, "That’s a lot of Wildebeest."

The Ebola Anti-Hysteria Hysteria

From Holman Jenkins, at the Wall Street Journal:

People are irrational in their assessment of risks, blah, blah. Yes, we can find here and there examples of Americans overreacting to Ebola. But more in evidence has been media’s own anti-hysteria hysteria. This week a Bloomberg Radio host rudely and repeatedly (and uncharacteristically) hushed a Wall Street analyst for suggesting we still have things to learn about how the virus is transmitted. Guess what? This is true. What’s more the virus is subject to forces of natural selection, so even our broadly reliable generalizations about transmissibility are hardly written in stone.

The media, as if citing an iron law, keep telling us that (to use the New York Times formulation) “people infected with Ebola cannot spread the disease until they begin to display symptoms, and it cannot be spread through the air.”

Sorry, each clause of that sentence is subject to caveat, and the whole thought needs to be preceded with the words “government scientists believe . . . .”

Acknowledging these realities is not tantamount to saying an uncontained breakout is likely or possible in the United States. A person deliberately infected and sent among us in an act of bioterrorism wouldn’t be able to infect any sizable number of people given what we know about Ebola. The average American is in far more danger from a ham sandwich or the neighborhood salad bar. Yet much sense was spoken on PBS on Wednesday night by Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University, who said: “I would like not to call it irrational. When people are just learning about something, something that they regard as a threat, and they haven’t integrated all of this information still into their thought process, their sense of anxiety obviously increases.”

Oh, so it's not irrational to worry about the spread of Ebola? And that's coming from an infectious disease expert? Well, what do you know? I thought No More Mister had laid down the final word about the Ebola hysteria, which is of course that it's all a Republican plot to make President Obola look bad just before the midterms! See, "YOU'LL HAVE TO DO THE PANICKING FOR US, DOUG."

You know, because it's only the evil Fox News hacks that are making people "panic." Good to know, Steve M. Obviously this Dr. William Schaffner is a tea party shill!

Giants Defeat Royals 11-4 in Game 4 of #WorldSeries

Pretty impressive victory. I recall looking at the Royals bench yucking it up in the early innings. Heh, never a good idea to get cocky.

The series is tied a two game apiece.

Final Score #SFGiants win 11-4, tie the #WorldSeries 2-2 Pence 3-for-5 3 RBI Sandoval 2-for-5 2 RBI Petit (W) pic.twitter.com/EL7azDfabA

— #OctoberTogether (@SFGiants) October 26, 2014

#sfgiants come back with huge burst of runs, tie Series at 2-2: http://t.co/mb0tyRwwtf

— Henry Schulman (@hankschulman) October 26, 2014

Bruce Bochy to Stick with Ryan Vogelsong for Game 4 of the #WorldSeries

After watching the Kansas City Royals just destroy both the Angels and the Orioles, I'm not surprised now that the Giants are down 2-1 in the World Series. I've got a grudging admiration for Kansas City, the problem is, they're just not my team. And as a Californian I'd obviously prefer San Francisco, especially considering their own fairy tale victories in the National League playoffs. It's been some great baseball this year.

But pitching is killing the Giants. No one can beat Madison Bumgarner, but after that it's anyone's guess if the Giants got game, even with home-field advantage.

So we'll see. Game 4 is starting right now.

In the meanwhile, here's Bill Shaikin, at LAT, "Royals getting harder to deal with, beat Giants and lead World Series":

Vogelsong and the #SFGiants try to tie up the #WorldSeries in Game 4 at 5 PT. http://t.co/C2cW85bk3j #OctoberTogether pic.twitter.com/gwImxsJoMK

— #OctoberTogether (@SFGiants) October 25, 2014

SAN FRANCISCO — Zack Greinke asked out of Kansas City four years ago. He was in the prime of his career. He would not sign a new contract with the Royals because he wanted to win and, as he told anyone who asked, he did not believe the Royals could win.

Greinke has taken his talents to the Milwaukee Brewers, to the Angels, and to the Dodgers. He has yet to pitch in the World Series.

And just look at the team he jilted now. The Royals are halfway to the World Series championship.

Alcides Escobar, one of the players the Royals acquired for Greinke, got two hits and scored two runs Friday. Lorenzo Cain, another of the players in the trade, drove in a run and made two splendid catches in right field. And Kansas City got four hitless innings out of its splendid bullpen to close out a 3-2 victory over the San Francisco Giants in Game 3 of the World Series.

The Royals lead the Series, two games to one. The record of the largely anonymous underdog Kansas City squad this postseason: 10-1.

"There's no intimidation on this team," Cain said. "No one's intimidated. It's just a baseball game."

The only pitcher to beat the Royals in the postseason: Giants ace Madison Bumgarner. Although another loss would put the Giants on the verge of elimination, Manager Bruce Bochy said he would stick with Ryan Vogelsong for Game 4 — even though Bumgarner said he would be willing to start on short rest.

"It's not like he pushed real hard," Bochy said.

More.

Bumgarner can of course start Game 5, and it's a good thing too. No matter what happens, the Giants will head back to Kansas City, where the Royals may well be able to finish them off.

Ezra Levant Eviscerates Craven Leftist Whitewashing of Islamic Terrorism

Ezra's on fire here.

The dude's a national treasure, and you can see how dangerous he is to the leftist paradigm of supine acquiescence to the Islamic takeover of the Western democracies.

The Scene from 'Fury' That Drives Pansy-Assed Progs Into the Arms of Their Metrosexual Mommies

If you think "Fury" represents the vision of war that victimizes its soldiers, turns them into hulking carcasses of PTSD, consigning them to a life of depression, ever sulking from their committal of human rights "abuses," then you might be a pacified progressive, brain-addled pansy-assed leftist loser --- like the sorry specimen of a man David Edelstein, at the spineless far-left outlet the Vulture, "David Ayer Represents the Best and Worst of American Filmmaking With His WWII–Set Fury."

Exhibit A in this pussified case study of the pathetic progressive pacifist oeuvre: Edelstein's response to the summary execution scene in which Don "Wardaddy" Collier (Brad Pitt) forces Norman Ellison (Logan Lerman) to shoot a f-king Nazi in the back. Watch, "I Cant Do It":



And here's Edelstein at the review:

The scarred, leather-faced tank commander, Don “Wardaddy” Collier (an aggressively deglamorized Brad Pitt), butchers a solitary German officer rather than take him prisoner [in the opening scene]. A short time later, he not only decides to shoot an SS man who surrenders to him, but he forces — in an excruciatingly prolonged scene — a jittery clerk-typist, Private Norman Ellison (Logan Lerman), to pull the trigger. “Don’t make me do this!” weeps Ellison as Collier slaps him and wrestles him into position to fire a bullet into the head of a man who has pulled out photos of his wife and children and is begging for his life. And then — blam!

"Weeps Ellison." OMG terrible. Just terrible!

An American master sergeant deep into enemy territory --- in Germany in 1945! --- who actually kills Germans! And one who actually makes his grunts kill Germans --- lest they kill him! The horrors!

Remember, leftists turn soldiers into victims. The actual fighting of enemies is "dehumanizing." Never mind that World War II's campaign against the Nazis is probably the closest you're going to get of good fighting evil in the history of modern warfare. The old saw goes "War is hell" for a good reason. And more than any other war movie in recent times --- and some are saying more than any other war movie ever made --- "Fury" displays the unvarnished truth of men in combat, and the nobility of fighting for what's right, even in the face of impossible odds.

I've read a lot of reviews of this film --- pretty much everything that's been written on it, frankly --- and plenty of reviewers are horrified by the sheer brutality of David Ayer's production, using such words as "psychotic" to describe Brad Pitt's "Wardaddy" (John Anderson, at the Wall Street Journal, "‘Fury’ Fueled by Fear") or "hot air" to describe "Wardaddy's" view that "Ideals are peaceful — history is violent" (Ty Burr, at the Boston Globe, "‘Fury’ takes on WWII, with Brad Pitt in command").

More than anything, pacified leftists are terrified that people might in fact consider the unflinching moral clarity of an earlier era far superior to the criminal cowardice of the left's contemporary reign of political correctness.

See the review at The Truth About Guns, for example, "Movie Review: Fury":

Here’s the long and short of it: Fury is probably the best Hollywood WW2 movie since “Saving Private Ryan.” It has courage. It has heart. It is intentionally upsetting. It has unrelenting battle scenes that will have you on the edge of your seat and more than slightly repulsed at the carnage. It has an underlying message of resistance to evil, devotion to faith and ethics that viewers can accept or ignore. The film works as Grand Guignol just as well as it works as a religious statement.

Fury left me deeply moved and more admiring than ever of the Greatest Generation. More than anything, it left me shaking my head about the nation we have become, and how we became such a pale imitation of what we once were.

Word, brother. Mother f-king Word.

Google Executive Breaks Space-Jump Record

So, how long until Felix Baumgartner suits up to reclaim the world record, heh?

At the New York Times, "Parachutist’s Record Fall: Over 25 Miles in 15 Minutes: Alan Eustace Jumps From Stratosphere, Breaking Felix Baumgartner’s World Record."

iOWNTHEWORLD is Now iOTWReport

Be sure to update your feeds and links.

Go to IOTWReport.

And don't miss this hilarious comedy sketch, "Why taking a dump in a Kohl’s dressing room is never a good idea."

New York Hatchet Jihad

The Islamic jihadists keep coming and coming, and progressive keep denying and denying. The sooner people call it for what it is --- Islamic jihad --- the more lives that will be saved.

At the New York Times, "Attacker With Hatchet Is Said to Have Grown Radical on His Own."

He grew radical "on his own"? Okay, although for some strange reason he was attracted to jihadi terrorist groups like al Qaeda and Islamic State. So, technically, he was "under the influence" of transnational Islamic terrorism. That's not quite the same thing as acting "on his own." Indeed, all these nuances are utterly stupid. These deluded crazies don't need to be rank-and-file cadres in large terrorist cells. They aren't radicalized in isolation. They're going to kill one way or the other. And there's going to be no other way to prevent such murders without aggressive anti-terrorist programs, the kind that are under assault from all the leftist political correctness.

Also at Pamela's, "NYC police commissioner: Hatchet attack was terror":

The fact is, there are no “lone wolves” in the global jihad.

Obama Criticized as More Concerned with Burnishing Legacy Than with Helping Democrat Candidates

Suck it Democrats.

Y'all backed this dirtbag inexperienced community organizer for POTUS. You're stuck with this failed cluster now, and that's YOUR legacy.

Suck it up.

At LAT, "Democratic candidates worry Obama is helping their rivals":

For months, the White House has insisted that President Obama would do all he could to help his party in the midterm election. Now that he’s started, some Democrats wonder whether he could help a little bit less.

In a rocky return to the campaign trail, Obama has served up campaign fodder for Republican opponents in a formal speech and in an off-the-cuff interview. He’s been heckled by immigration activists angry about his decision to delay executive action on deportation. On Sunday, he watched a chunk of his audience head for the exits — apparently to avoid traffic — before the end of his stump speech.

The slip-ups have even extended to the usually disciplined first lady, who campaigned in Iowa for Senate candidate Bruce Braley but repeatedly called the congressman by the wrong last name. After she went back Tuesday for a do-over, a White House news release got Braley’s name right but his title wrong.

Democrats have witnessed the performances, cringed and complained, offering a preview of the finger-pointing that might come if the party fares poorly in the Nov. 4 election.

“It doesn’t open up a new line of attack, but it freshens one right as voters are tuning in,” said a campaign advisor, one of several Democrats who would not be quoted by name while discussing the president’s effect on elections.

The focus of much of their frustration has been Obama’s off-message comments, which undermined a key strategy for many Democratic candidates — to distance themselves from the unpopular president.

Several Democratic strategists and campaign advisors noted Obama’s blunders were minor problems compared with the drag his sunken approval rating is putting on their candidates.

Still, they saw in the missteps a window into a president’s mind-set and his political operation. They blamed a White House political team disconnected from the tough realities of campaigning and a president better at selling himself than his party...

Ah, far-left Sturm und Drang  --- you gotta love it!

More at that top link.

Retracing the Steps of the New York Ebola Patient

Good luck with that.

At NYT.

Retracing the steps of the New York Ebola patient http://t.co/rMlqr5PVtg pic.twitter.com/ga1JviBp9p

— The New York Times (@nytimes) October 25, 2014

Michelle Nunn: 'Fugly shemail Obama loving Democrat'

OMG I'm dying here.

This dude is crackin' me up!

@ChrisCoon4 @AmPowerBlog David Perdue he is my vote. I ain't voting for no Fugly shemail Obama loving Democrat

— Thomas Kayler (@KCSI_RW) October 25, 2014

Terry Keenan Dies at 53

I remember when she used to appear on Lou Dobbs' show years ago, on CNN. Cute as a button.

She was my age --- in other words, way too young to go. RIP.

At Fox News, "Former Fox News anchor Terry Keenan dies at 53, according to Hollywood Reporter."

Have Dems Lost Millennials?

No, but it's not looking good for the idiot Democrat-progs.

At the Hill, "Millennial voters a new worry for Dems":

Disenchantment among millennial voters is the latest worry for Democrats fighting to hold their Senate majority.

Young voters rallied to President Obama’s side when he first ran for the White House in 2008, and then defied predictions that their enthusiasm would drop off in 2012.

But there is no guarantee they will turn out for Democrats at the polls next month.
Plagued by unemployment and economic anxiety, 18- to 34-year-olds feel a sense of disappointment in the party it helped boost in previous elections, political observers say.

Jim Manley, a Democratic strategist and former spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), said the promise of “hope and change millennials invested in has hit a brick wall.”

Manley said that this in turn has made young voters “very cynical about the political process and less likely to vote than they had in the past.”

Julian Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University, agreed that winning over young voters is an issue for Democrats.

“Obama in 2008 had been successful at exciting millennials about political institutions they distrusted and giving them faith in an economy that really wasn’t delivering on the American dream,” Zelizer said.

Since then, Zelizer added, Obama “seems like politics as normal while the economy continues to crawl.”

“Democrats have failed to really lock in their support,” he said.

A poll released earlier this year showed a significant decline in the number of Democratic-leaning millennials who planned to vote in the midterm elections.

The survey, conducted by Harvard University’s Institute of Politics, found that young voters are increasingly turned off by the political environment.

It revealed that a mere 23 percent of Democratic-leaning millennials said they would vote in the midterm elections. That was down from the 31 percent who said they would vote in the 2010 midterm elections. (Only 24 percent actually showed up at the polls that year.)

At the same time, the poll indicated that 32 percent of conservative-leaning millennials said they would vote in the election.

“We’ve seen a growing disenchantment with Democrats generally,” John Della Volpe, director of polling at the Institute of Politics, said in an interview.

While millennials were an important part of the Democratic coalition in recent election cycles, that same coalition appeared to be “fractured” now — something that should concern Democrats, Della Volpe said.

Sensing a weakness, Republicans have pounced...

Well, Republicans shouldn't get cocky. It's a pox on both houses, as far as I'm concerned. But the fault lies with young voters themselves.

Recall, there's no youth movement today to speak of, as I wrote last weekend, "Where Is the Anti-War Movement?" That said, the problems facing young people nowadays are no less daunting than those facing youth in the '60s and '70s, with the obvious exception of the draft. On the economy, for example, there's simply no expectation that today's youth will enjoy a higher standard of living than their parents. Perhaps that's not enough to get voters out in the streets and to the polls, but it's nevertheless going to take major social change to bring about the kind of structural reforms that will trigger lasting improvements in the quality of life for young people. One place to start with be with restoring basic liberty, on the economy in particular. Democrats, of course, won't do that, so Millennials may decide to give the idiot Democrat-progs the boot once and for all. Indeed, that's the gist of it from the Hill article. So continue reading.

Sexy Girls in Halloween Costumes

At Toasted on the Inside.

The 'Colorado Model' Goes Thud

This is just ticklish.

From Kim Strassel, at WSJ, "Republicans are poised to make big gains in the state Democrats thought would be a national model for liberal governance":

Alamosa, Colo.

The political class is so focused on what Democrats may lose Nov. 4 that it has largely missed what the party already has lost. So much for the much-vaunted “Colorado Model.”

Nothing has buoyed the progressive left more in recent years than a self-satisfied belief in that blueprint, Exhibit A in their promise of a new Democratic majority. The party poured money into the Centennial State, building an activist infrastructure honed to outspend and attack Republican candidates. These messages were aimed at what was described as an ascendant coalition of liberal whites moving to the state, and minorities—who would join to keep Colorado blue for decades.

It seemed to be working. Democrats, beginning in 2004, would ultimately take from Republicans the state legislature, the governorship, both U.S. Senate seats, key House districts and a variety of statewide offices. The media pronounced a new Democratic dominance of the Mountain West, and the left promised exportation of its model far and wide.

Or not. If Colorado is serving as a model for anything these days, it’s the risks of Democratic overreach. Sen. Mark Udall has trailed GOP Rep. Cory Gardner in every poll since September. Gov. John Hickenlooper is trailing Republican Bob Beauprez in poll averages. Republicans are poised to take back the state Senate. Democrats recently pulled funding from the only Colorado U.S. House seat they had targeted, that of GOP Rep. Mike Coffman.

The party’s biggest mistake was thinking its recent electoral victories—based largely on a superior campaign game—translated into a mandate for liberal governance. Colorado long has been, and remains, a pragmatic state. It’s a place that for decades gave Republicans the state legislature and Democrats the governor’s mansion. It loves its political independents, folks like former Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, who it elected in 1992 as a Democrat and re-elected in 1998 by an even bigger margin as a Republican.

No surprise, the state hasn’t appreciated Mr. Obama’s ideological agenda. Some 22,000 residents just found out they’re losing health insurance; some 200,000 more face cancellations next year. Residents are worried about Ebola and the terror threat, frustrated by falling incomes, disturbed by Washington scandals. The president’s approval rating—in supposedly liberal-ascendant Colorado—is 40%...

More.