Friday, August 7, 2015

Suspect Takes Down Long Beach Couple's Front-Porch American Flag and Burns It Right There on the Street (VIDEO)

An America-hating leftist, obviously.

It's who they are. It's what they do.

At the Long Beach Press-Telegram, "Long Beach police seek man who burned American flag":

Long Beach police and fire investigators are looking for a man caught on tape burning an American flag.

The flag was hanging from the home of John and Salvacion Tyson in the 6200 block of Pageantry Street when a man removed it around 12:47 a.m. July 25, according to a press release from the Long Beach Police Department.

Surveillance video shows the man walking up the victims’ front porch area 20 minutes earlier, then hanging around for a bit. He finally takes the 5-feet-by-9-feet nylon flag down from its base, walks it around a car to the street, ignites it with an open flame and then walks away.

The flames can be seen in the upper righthand corner of the video.

Investigators believe the person responsible is local, said Long Beach Fire Arson Investigator Dennis Zigrang. He asked anyone with information — including the person responsible — to come forward.

“If the individual who actually did this sees this, he can call me and make arrangements to come in and see me,” Zigrang said.
More.

Sen. Lindsey Graham Calls for U.S. Ground Troops in Iraq and Syria (VIDEO)

Well, being one of the last neocons out here, I have to applaud Sen. Graham, and I know that's not a popular position with a lot of conservatives, considering "Grahamnesty's" many more RINO positions. But still. Almost all serious analysts of the crisis in the Middle East argue that token contingents of U.S. advisers just won't cut it. If we're serious about destroying Islamic State, then we need to send in the manpower to take them out. Graham's willing to say what everybody else will not. Indeed, maybe that's why he's even in the race, to secure a platform on which to lay out the stakes for the Republican Party. It's pretty fascinating in that regard.

Watch: "Lindsey Graham: An air campaign alone won't destroy ISIS | Fox News Republican Debate."

Here's That Frank Luntz Focus Group Segment on Megyn Kelly's Show After the GOP Debate (VIDEO)

This is why I'm super excited to see the next batch of polls on the GOP field. If regular American voters are anything like the folks from Luntz's focus group, there's going to be quite a letdown in Trump-topia.

Watch: "Frank Luntz focus group turns on Trump during GOP Debate."

My initial reaction is here, "Donald Trump to Megyn Kelly: 'I don't have time for political correctness...' (VIDEO)."

Hat Tip: Hot Air, "Video: Not very classy focus group dumps on Trump after debate."

Fox News Couldn't Kill Donald Trump's Momentum and May Have Only Made It Stronger (VIDEO)

I don't know. I think Charles Krauthammer's hot take was right on, but Trump appears to be winning the post-debate buzz.

From Joshua Green, at Bloomberg (via Memeorandum):
Judging by Thursday’s electric debate, he may have sensed his true opponent before anyone else had a clue: the network.

A few hours before Thursday’s Fox News debate, a friend of Donald Trump’s confided to me that Trump was nervous. Not about the competition—he could handle them. No, Trump worried about Fox News, and in particular, debate moderator Megyn Kelly. She’d been hammering him all week on her show, and he was certain she was out to get him. He’d canceled a Fox News appearance on Monday night, the friend said, in order to avoid her. (Trump’s spokeswoman wouldn’t confirm or deny this.)

It turns out Trump was right. His toughest opponents Thursday night weren’t the candidates up on stage, but the Fox News moderators, who went right after him—none with more gusto than Kelly.

Kelly, the whip-smart queen of Fox News’ blonde stunners, went straight for the jugular. “You've called women you don't like fat pigs, dogs, slobs and disgusting animals,” she admonished Trump. “Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as president?”

But Trump saw her coming a mile away and cut her off. “Only Rosie O’Donnell,” he barked, drawing cheers from the crowd. When Kelly tried to point out that he had insulted more women than O’Donnell, Trump, as he would all night, steamrolled right past her. “The big problem this country has is being politically correct,” Trump practically shouted, invoking conservatives’ favorite term of disdain. “I’ve been challenged by so many people and I don't frankly have time for total political correctness and to be honest with you this country doesn't have time either.” The crowd went wild.

Maybe they were cheering because the question was apropos of something Rachel Maddow would ask, and they were, after all, Republicans. But I think they were cheering because it was clear, at that moment, that Trump was going to be Trump, and wasn’t going to heed the pundits and phonies to tone down his act. According to a report in New York magazine, even his own daughter, Ivanka, was making that case.

When it became clear last week that Trump was the Republican front-runner, everyone assumed that the big battle shaping up in Republican politics was going to be between Trump and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush. But judging by Thursday’s raucous, electric debate, Trump may have sensed his true opponent before anyone else had a clue: It’s Fox News. Throughout the evening, Trump and his inquisitors battled back and forth like gladiators. Both parties emerged as huge winners. Though nearly devoid of substance, it was the most entertaining debate I’ve ever seen.

Trump led the way. His ethos—the blustering bravado and aggression—became the ethos of the whole affair. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie went bananas on Kentucky Senator Rand Paul. The crowd was roaring throughout. There was none of the stilted, awkward talk of the junior debate earlier in the evening. Political Twitter was throbbing with joy and satisfaction.

Hurling insults, Trump went after O’Donnell, political reporters, Bowe Bergdahl, China, Mexico, Japan, money lenders, and practically everyone in Washington. “Our leaders are stupid,” he said, “Our politicians are stupid.” He did stop short of calling Mexicans “rapists,” but not by much. “We need to build a wall, and it has to be built quickly,” he said. “We need to keep illegals out.”

While the moderators went after Trump, the candidates mostly shied away from him. In fact, consciously or otherwise, several echoed his points and nearly everyone tried to match his energy. Some even seemed to genuflect. “Donald Trump is hitting a nerve in this country,” Ohio Governor John Kasich said at one point. “Mr. Trump is touching a nerve because people want to see a wall being built.”

Only Paul mustered the nerve to launch a pair of (pretty weak) direct attacks. He might have regretted it. Trump dispatched him with a single, withering aside (“You’re having a hard time tonight”) that was all the more effective because it was true.

Trump’s Fox News antagonists had their moments, too. When moderator Chris Wallace invoked the four bankruptcies his companies have suffered, Trump, seeming genuinely angry, repeatedly fell back on an oddly phrased legalism: “I have used the laws of this country just like the greatest people you read about in the business section,” he said.

But it was Kelly who inflicted the deepest cut by rattling off the liberal positions Trump once held and stopping him cold with the question: “When did you actually become a Republican?” Trump’s bluster escaped him. He stammered nervously and seemed lost. “I’ve evolved on many issues over the years, and do you know who else has? Ronald Reagan,” he said feebly. “Very much evolved.” That’s as un-Trump-like a phrase as I’ve heard from him, something more befitting 2012 nominee Mitt Romney.

What’s more interesting than any Trump question or answer, though, was the larger dynamic at play...
Still more.

Trump Dominates First #GOP Presidential Debate

Donald Trump tweeted the cover photo, but there's more to the article than its cover.

See, "Trump dominates -- and likely hurt himself -- in first debate."



I do think he hurt himself with centrist voters, the kind of folks that Frank Luntz interviewed last night --- to the lasting consternation of The Donald!

Donald Trump's Twitter Tirade

From Philip Klein, at the Washington Examiner, "Trump's Twitter tirade: Megyn Kelly a 'bimbo,' Frank Luntz a 'clown'."

Megyn Kelly will no doubt respond tonight on her show. Frank Luntz, on the other hand, can be seen at CBS News This Morning, "How voters responded to Trump in Cleveland GOP debate."

He's not very apologetic, heh.

Tania Ciolko Questions Candidates in GOP Presidential Debate

It happened so fact I didn't notice, but Fox News misspelled Tania's last name as "Cioloko."

But they got it right at the Philadelphia Enquirer, "Philly health-care worker queries candidates in GOP debate":

Tania Ciolko photo 10915234_10203688514910419_2965653789690540065_n_zps3wx9nwaz.jpg
TANIA CIOLKO filmed her question for GOP candidates before the debate Thursday night, but never expected it'd be aired live and answered on national television.

"Most people I know want to work," she told the 10 presidential hopefuls. "They don't want handouts. They want the freedom and opportunity to create a living based upon their own talents." She wanted candidates to name one thing they'd do to promote small-business growth and entrepreneurship, after the nation's economy declined in the previous decade.

She posted the video to YouTube and waited.

It wasn't used during the earlier "Happy Hour" debate featuring nonprofit executive Carly Fiorina and former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania.

She switched on the second debate.

"I was just kind of convinced after the first hour that they weren't going to air it," she said.

But they did, and U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida answered.

Ciolko, reached at her home in Northeast Philly on Thursday night, said she wanted candidates to give "specific, no-spin answers."

"Don't give me laundry lists or rhetoric," said Ciolko, who described herself as a health-care analyst at a Philly area hospital, and whose last name was misspelled by Fox.

Although Rubio did rattle off several ideas for fixing the economy - including cutting taxes, fostering growth of small businesses and even repealing Obamacare - a somewhat starstruck Ciolko wasn't ready to judge the response just yet.

"I was just so blown away," she said. "Before I commit to anything on this, I want to review [the debate]."

And, she said, she hopes Democratic candidates will offer up answers, too.

"It's an important question," she said. "We all have dreams, we want to work hard and build them."

After the question aired, she thanked Rubio on Twitter and got several replies from friends.

Her phone was ringing off the hook with well-wishers Thursday night.

"Hopefully this will spark more dialogue on how we can solve this," she said.
And ICYMI, watch the video, "Tania Gail Asks Question to Candidates at #GOPDebate!"

At Katmai National Park, With Thousands of Bears Near Campground Every Summer, Visitors Must Follow the Rules

Can't be too careful with those bears. Big bears. Hungry bears, heh.

Here's video, "The Bears are Back!"

And at the New York Times, "At Katmai National Park in Alaska, Bears Rule":
Katmai National Park sprawls over four million acres in southern Alaska. So why does its only established campground allow for just 60 people per night — a limit that leads to an online booking fray every January? The answer is also one of the park’s main draws, and its primary claim to national fame: bears. Lots of them — about 2,200 at the National Park Service’s last count, with 60 or so regulars that hang around Brooks Camp every summer. In theory, you can camp elsewhere in Katmai, but the campground has an electric fence and constant activity, making it an unlikely place to find a bear too close to your tent for sleeping comfort.

By last spring, just about a year into my life as a full-time Alaskan, I had designs on spending time at Brooks Camp, long considered one of the state’s premier bear-viewing spots. Campground spots for July — peak season for viewing brown bears fishing, establishing hierarchy and practicing their version of flirting (the boys can be such pests) — can be reserved as of Jan. 5 every year, and go quickly. So by early May, having missed my window, I had long given up on making it, figuring I would have to spend another season watching the bears via webcams.

Streaming since July 2012, Katmai’s webcams, set up by Explore.org, (there are four trained on brown bear fishing areas) have turned the local bears into social media celebrities and, for their most loyal followers, the biggest incentives to board a floatplane to Brooks, where dozens of bears return each summer to bulk up on salmon in the Brooks River. (Bulk is the operative word; by November, when the bears start turning in for their long winter’s naps, the males can weigh 1,000 pounds or more.)

My Facebook feed had been lighting up with bear news for weeks — friends across the country all playing a seasonal parlor game trying to figure out if bear 32, a.k.a. Chunk, had improved his fishing skills or if bear 814, a.k.a. Lurch, was going to calm down this year, or if he would continue to intimidate other bears out of their prized fishing spots. The live streams had interrupted more than a few of my own work hours, too.

While on a spring camping trip in Denali National Park, an acquaintance casually presented a near-miraculous offer: “I reserved a camping spot for two people at Brooks Camp in July but can’t use it. You want it? I think it was about $50.” I recruited my Anchorage-born friend Tara Stevens, an experienced angler, and we were off. The virtual experience, I hoped, would soon be real.

After an Alaska Airlines flight from Anchorage to the town of King Salmon, we collected our bags stuffed with layers of clothing, rain gear, camping and cooking gear, and food, and headed to the Katmai Air Service office for the flight to Brooks Camp, which sits at the confluence of Naknek Lake and the Brooks River. After weighing in for the flight — when traveling by floatplane in Alaska, you get used to people telling you to hop on a scale — we were soon climbing skyward in a blue and white 1962 de Havilland Otter, its single engine drowning out any conversation.

Thick clouds hung overhead and even the grassy areas below looked slightly gray. Color broke through now and again — bright green roofs on a small group of buildings below, a pale aqua river threading through the glum landscape.

Twenty minutes later, we descended onto Naknek Lake, the plane bumping along on its floats toward the driftwood-strewn beach and the Brooks Camp employees waiting there. (Brooks Camp also has cabins run by a park concessionaire, Katmailand; they’re spare and pricey but a good option for the camping-averse.) Everybody on the plane, which holds 10 passengers, was a bit giddy as we rolled toward the start of the summer adventure, like the first moments arriving at sleep-away camp.

We were directed to the visitors’ center for the “Brooks Camp School of Bear Etiquette,” meant to keep visitors and the bears coexisting peacefully. Orientation started with a 10-minute film. The clothing and hairstyles were delightfully out of date, but the how-to’s still applied: Keep 50 yards from any bear; 100 yards from a bear with cubs. Move back as a bear moves closer. When hiking, stay alert and make sounds — talking and clapping — so bears know you’re there. If a bear gets too close, don’t run — it may think you’re prey. Speak to the bear in a firm but calm voice. Then start to walk back slowly. Give the bear the right of way.

After the film, a ranger rehashed some of the key points, gave us lapel pins that indicated we had been through bear school, and sent us on our way.

We loaded our gear onto a wheeled cart and headed down the trail toward the campground. Though it was about a third of a mile from the visitors’ center, that first walk seemed quite a bit longer. Thick woods were on the left and, on our right, a thinnish strip of trees blocking our view of the beach, where, it had been made clear, bears loved to wander.

“How has nobody been mauled here?” Tara asked. We kept a slightly-louder-than-normal rambling conversation going. There might have been singing.

Soon enough we rolled the cart through the campground’s electric fence, which didn’t look as if it could keep out a kitten. It was tempting to touch the fence, but I decided to trust the park service and stayed shock free.

The tent up, we headed back down the trail to grab dinner at the lodge.

But before long: “Bear in camp! Bear in camp!”

A ranger’s shout went up outside the lodge, warning people to stay or get inside. The dining room tables emptied as people ran to the windows. Two brown bears, their long claws in clear view, loped through the camp, did a few circles just feet from the lodge porch, and ran back off. I had spent plenty of time in bear country before, but the pair’s romp made it so much clearer that we were playing in the bears’ world. I got ever that much giddier about spending two nights exploring the area...
A great story.

Keep reading.

Carly Fiorina Dominates Internet Search Traffic After GOP Presidential Debate

Makes sense, "Carly Fiorina Wins GOP's 'Happy Hour' Debate Hands Down."

From Hadas Gold, at Politico, "Carly Fiorina dominates search traffic."

Charles Krauthammer Pans Donald Trump's Performance in GOP Presidential Debate

I mentioned this earlier, "Donald Trump to Megyn Kelly: 'I don't have time for political correctness...' (VIDEO)."

And now here's the video, "Charles Krauthammer gives his analysis on the debate."

Thursday, August 6, 2015

Rand Paul Goes After Chris Christie on National Security in GOP Presidential Debate (VIDEO)

More debate moments like this, please!

Watch, at Fox News, "Chris Christie, Rand Paul spar over NSA — Fox News Republican Debate."

Donald Trump to Megyn Kelly: 'I don't have time for political correctness...' (VIDEO)

Watch: "Is Donald Trump part of the 'war on women'? — Fox News Republican Debate."

And at the Hill, "Trump threatens to not be 'nice' to Megyn Kelly."

Tonight's debate confirmed what people have been saying about Donald Trump for a long time. He's a blustery blowhard and a bully. Personally, I thought he did well on a lot of questions, but clearly he often grasped for details and was unable to provide hard answers. That part about a single payer national health system had me cringing. That was like dafuq?

I'll have more about Trump, that's for sure. Charles Krauthammer was especially critical in the post-debate analysis.

Tania Gail Asks Question to Candidates at #GOPDebate!

Wow, that was a trip!


Boom! Carly Fiorina Slams Iran Nuclear Agreement in GOP 'Happy Hour' Debate (VIDEO)

I think this was the high point of her performance, and it was all good.



PREVIOUSLY: "Carly Fiorina Wins GOP's 'Happy Hour' Debate Hands Down."

Carly Fiorina Wins GOP's 'Happy Hour' Debate Hands Down

Here's the instant analysis from Jonathan Tobin, at Commentary, "If Debates Mean Anything, Fiorina’s On the Way Up":

Carly Fiorina photo CLw0jPjXAAA8aBL_zpsukrc4ndk.jpg
There’s little doubt that the best performance in the second tier Republican debate came from Carly Fiorina. The former Hewlett Packard CEO showed that she had a strong command of foreign policy as well as economic issues. She’s been scoring points on the campaign trail against Hillary Clinton for months but on the stage in Cleveland she showed herself willing to also take on Donald Trump. She also managed to articulate a conservative vision that channeled GOP icon Ronald Reagan better than any of the others on the stage. Though not all of her competitors sounded as if they belonged in the junior varsity event (though some did), Fiorina was the one that had the Twittersphere saying that she ought to be invited to stay and join the top ten debate at 9pm. But the question is whether even a home run hit at 5pm before an empty arena in Cleveland can influence enough voters to get her into contention?

Anyone who’s been paying attention to the campaign so far already knows that Fiorina has been outstanding on the stump and in her limited exposure in the media. She’s confident, well spoken and understands the issues. Her political resume — one failed attempt at a Senate seat in deep blue California — is thin. But in a field where candidates like Trump and Ben Carson are taken seriously, that doesn’t seem to disqualify her. But to date Fiorina hasn’t gotten any traction in the polls.

Is it because voters agree with pundits that assume she’s running for vice president or a cabinet post in the next Republican administration? Maybe. But it’s also possible that in polls that are largely a function of name recognition (right, Mr. Trump?), she remains an obscure figure.

In 2012 the numerous GOP debates bored a lot of the public and the press as they turned into a reality show more than forums of ideas. But they also had a powerful impact on the shape of the race eliminating some candidates (Tim Pawlenty, Rick Perry) and elevated others (Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum) while giving frontrunner Mitt Romney the opportunity to prove he was the best of a bad lot. Will they play the same role in 2016? Fiorina might not be the best test [case] for that proposition since it’s not yet clear how many people were watching at 5pm. But if they do, then perhaps Fiorina will shoot up in the polls. She ought to get enough of a bump into the first string on the basis of such a strong showing. That’s something that ought to scare the people who will debate at 9pm...
Well, that's what I was saying, but we'll see. We'll see.

More.

Greta Van Susteren's Interview with Carly Fiorina Ahead of GOP Debate on Fox News

I'll have more from the debate as video becomes available. Meanwhile, here's Greta's interview with Ms. Fiorina.



PREVIOUSLY: "Following Fox GOP Debate Buzz, Reposting Carly Fiorina's Book, Rising to the Challenge: My Leadership Journey."

Following Fox GOP Debate Buzz, Reposting Carly Fiorina's Book, Rising to the Challenge: My Leadership Journey

Well, if you're on Twitter, it's hands down acclimation: Carly Fiorina nailed the win at tonight's first GOP presidential debate on Fox News. I expect the buzz from tonight's performance will help her in the polls, perhaps enough to boost her into the ranks of the top tier. She should be on that stage for the prime time debates, and she handily proved it today.

She's particularly good on national security. Man, she just wowed it.

More on that later.

Meanwhile, I'm reposting her book: Rising to the Challenge: My Leadership Journey.

Carly Fiorina photo 11128056_10206951015036857_9072737723061276988_n_zpstcjyb1cz.jpg

Bounty Hunters Target Phoenix Police Chief's House by Mistake (VIDEO)

Bondsmen were tripped up by bogus social media tips, heh.

Wrong house, lol.

Watch, at ABC News 15 Phoenix, "Bondsmen raid Phoenix Police Chief’s home."

Also from the Arizona Republic, via Memeorandum, "Bounty hunters mistakenly target Phoenix police chief's house."

The Defeat of Japan Was Anything but Inevitable. Dropping the Bomb Was the Right Thing to Do

Screw the fascist leftists attacking the U.S. for defending its interests in August 1945. The numbers from the Battle of Okinawa are enough to justify the bombing alone. And remember, women and children were being armed with bamboo spears. The home islands were prepared to fight to the last. Is that what leftists want? Is that what they would have preferred? Millions of Japanese would have died, to say nothing of the quarter-million Americans who would have been killed in the invasion.

Realism. It's what's for dinner.

An outstanding essay, from Francis Pike, at the San Diego Union-Tribune, "Rethinking ‘The Bomb’ 70 years later":

Jap ... You're Next! photo 22Jap...You27re_Next5E_We27ll_Finish_the_Job22_-_NARA_-_513563_zpsdis3ebvp.jpg
Was dropping the “A” bomb moral, and did the technology it demonstrated make American victory in the Pacific war inevitable?

In the postwar period, some commentators have averred the United States need not have dropped an atomic bomb. They argue that it was only dropped to demonstrate American power to the Soviets and that it could have been demonstrated on unoccupied land. Furthermore, it is suggested that the bombing of a civilian city was a war crime. In other words, it was an unconscionable and immoral act.

Some contemporaneous commentators such as Adm. William Leahy, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Chester Nimitz, Gen. “Hap” Arnold and Adm. Bull Halsey thought the use of the atomic bomb was barbarous and unnecessary. These views are not convincing; the Japanese government in August 1945 was a very long way from accepting the unconditional surrender both President Franklin Roosevelt and his successor, Harry Truman, had demanded, and which the vast majority of Americans supported. Time and again, the U.S. military had been proved wrong in its anticipation of a Japanese surrender.

Japanese diplomats may have been keen to call time on Japan’s military adventurism but the die-hards were still intent on victory. Even after Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the Soviet declaration of war, Japan’s war minister, Gen. Korechika Anami, suggested, “Would it not be wondrous for the whole nation to be destroyed like a beautiful flower?” Japan’s ultranationalist army leaders had built a death cult that was incomprehensible to Western logic.

Waiting for American soldiers on the shores of Japan’s four main islands were 2.5 million troops plus a vast civilian reserve. Japan had assembled a force of 11,000 planes and thousands of suicide boats to thwart the American invasion and Adm. Onishi, the main architect of the kamikaze campaign, believed victory on land was possible “if we are prepared to sacrifice 20 million Japanese lives.”

As some 12,000 Americans had been killed at the Battle of Okinawa when faced with just 80,000 Japanese troops, the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff realistically estimated that the conquest of mainland Japan would cost 267,000 U.S. lives. Meanwhile, the War Department estimated up to 800,000 dead – more than double the American deaths in Europe in World War II. Japanese casualties, based on the universal refusal of their troops to surrender, were estimated at 3 million dead plus 5 million to 10 million civilians.

Presented with these forbidding numbers, no president of a democratically elected country could have spurned the use of the atomic bomb. Not using the bomb would have been greeted with utter incomprehension by nearly all Americans. As Secretary of War Henry Stimson observed, “No man … could have failed to use it [the A-bomb] and afterward have looked his countrymen in the face.”

For the GIs about to ship out to Japan, it was a reprieve. As Paul Fussell, a 21-year-old officer recalled, “We were going to live. We were going to grow up to adulthood after all.”

Furthermore, with only two atomic bombs available, a demonstration could not be afforded. Lastly, while the conspiracy theorists are adamant the bomb was used as a deterrent to the Soviet Union, the reality was that at the Potsdam Conference in July 1945, President Truman was urging Stalin to attack Japan so that America alone would not bear the burden of its defeat....
Keep reading.

Afghanistan: At Least Six Dead in First Major Taliban Attack Since Leadership Transition (VIDEO)

As many as nine may be dead, according to additional reports.

See the Telegraph UK, "Six dead in first major Afghan Taliban attack since power transition."

And from AFP, "Nine dead in Afghan Taliban's first major attacks since power change."