Tinder Decries L.A. Billboard Warning Users to Get Tested for STDs (VIDEO)

Heh, Robert Stacy McCain called it already, "‘Hit-It-and-Quit-It on Tinder’."

They want that billboard to come down.

At the Los Angeles Times, "Tinder demands removal of L.A. billboard that tells dating app users to get STD test":

Tinder has sent a cease and desist letter to the AIDS Healthcare Foundation after a billboard went up in Los Angeles last week that draws a link between dating apps and a growing rate of sexually transmitted diseases.

The foundation said the billboard's purpose is to raise awareness about the increasing STD rate and to encourage dating-app users to get regular screenings or a “free STD check.” The billboard features silhouettes of people and the words “Tinder, Chlamydia, Grindr, Gonorrhea.”

“In many ways, location-based mobile dating apps are becoming a digital bathhouse for millennials wherein the next sexual encounter can literally just be a few feet away—as well as the next STD,” Whitney Engeran-Cordova, the foundation’s public health division director, said in a statement.

“While these sexual encounters are often intentionally brief or even anonymous, sexually transmitted diseases can have lasting effects on an individual’s personal health and can certainly create epidemics in communities at large,” the statement continued.

But Tinder, a location-based dating app, has fired back, saying the ad wrongly associates the app with venereal disease.

“These unprovoked and wholly unsubstantiated accusations are made to irreparably damage Tinder’s reputation in an attempt to encourage others to take an HIV test by your organization,” Tinder attorney Jonathan Reichman said in a letter to the foundation.

The foundation responded that it would not remove the billboard. It also referenced a Vanity Fair article that attributed a boom in casual hookups to the emergence of dating apps like Tinder...

Hey, we've got you covered at AmPow. The Vanity Fair piece is here, "The Tinder Hookup Culture and the End of Dating."

Yep, goodbye dating and hello STDs!

There's still more at the Times, heh.

Asians to Be Top Immigrant Group by 2065

Look, we've had a huge surge of immigration over the last two decades, at least. It doesn't bother me, as long as people come legally and they learn to speak English. But no doubt we're reaching a tipping point. Irvine is a major ethnic enclave, especially for Asians. I don't love Chinese and Korean (or Japanese) drivers, but it's not the end of the world. The 99 Ranch Market is just across the way, so when I get coffee in the morning at the 7/11 just next door, sometimes, between the Asians and the Mexican day-laborers, there's hardly anyone speaking English. I just say hello, and hopefully they'll say hello back. If not, they're probably just off the boat.

In any case, USA Today has the general trends, "U.S. foreign-born population nears high."

And at the Los Angeles, "Asians to surpass Latinos as largest immigrant group in U.S., study finds":

Asians are likely to surpass Latinos as the nation's largest immigrant group shortly after the middle of the century as the wave of new arrivals from Latin America slows but trans-Pacific migration continues apace, according to a new study of census data.

The surge of immigration that has reshaped the American population over the last half century will transform the country for several decades to come, the projections indicate. Immigrants and their children are likely to make up 88% of the country's population growth over the next 50 years, according to the study by the Pew Research Center, which has tracked the effects of immigration on the country's population for the last several decades.

The foreign-born, who made up just 5% of the nation's population in 1965, when Congress completely rewrote the country's immigration laws, make up 14% today, the study found. They are projected to be 18% of the population by 2065.

Increasingly, that population growth will involve Asians. Unlike the Latino population, which mostly shares a common language, Spanish, and many cultural traits, the census category of Asian takes in a vast array of ethnic and language groups, including Japanese, Chinese, Koreans, Filipinos, Indians and Pakistanis.

Already, Asian Americans make up about 6% of the nation's population, up from just 1% in 1965. By the middle of the century they will total 14%, the projections say.

Asians are expected to constitute 36% of the immigrant population by 2055, surpassing Latinos, who by then will be 34% of immigrants, the study indicates. Since many Latinos are third- or fourth-generation Americans, they will remain a larger share of the total population, close to one-quarter of all Americans by midcentury.

Currently, Americans have a more positive view of Asian immigrants than of Latinos, according to a survey Pew did along with the population projections.

Nearly half of American adults, 47%, said immigrants from Asia have had a mostly positive effect on American society. Only 26% said the same about immigrants from Latin America, with 37% saying they thought the effects of Latin American immigration had been mostly negative. Immigrants from the Middle East fared worse in public opinion, with just 20% saying their effect on the country has been mostly positive, and 39% saying their impact has been mostly negative.

The survey found that 59% of Americans said immigrants, overall, were not learning English in a reasonable amount of time...

Yeah, like I was saying, it'd be better if all these newcomers would learn the language, sheesh.

But keep reading.

Republican Discontent Isn't Easing Up

At the Wall Street Journal, "GOP Discontent That Helped Sink John Boehner Isn’t Easing Up":

WASHINGTON—The tug-of-war within the Republican Party that helped end Rep. John Boehner’s career is likely to intensify this year both on Capitol Hill and in the tumultuous GOP presidential race.

The House speaker’s announcement Friday that he would leave Congress on Oct. 30 isn’t expected to mollify either the House’s most conservative faction, which is determined to take an unyielding stance in the face of fiscal deadlines, or dissatisfied GOP primary voters rooting for outsiders who have pledged to uproot Washington politics. The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows political novices Donald Trump, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina leading the GOP race.

On Capitol Hill, tension is mounting between Republicans hoping to notch incremental progress in dealing with a Democratic president and hard-liners who say they would be willing to shutter the government. That struggle will play out both in House GOP leadership elections over the next few weeks and as lawmakers tackle several deadline-driven issues this winter, including a longer-term budget deal and the need to raise the federal borrowing limit, known as the debt ceiling.

Mr. Boehner’s resignation will ease the most pressing problem facing Congress: the expiration of the government’s current funding on Sept. 30. Lawmakers are expected this week to pass a stopgap spending bill keeping the government funded through Dec. 11.

He could also help his successor by pushing through other bills that could pass only with the help of Democrats, such as raising the debt ceiling or reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank, moves that would be unpopular with some in the House GOP but seen as necessary by others. Mr. Boehner, who leaves office Oct. 30, indicated Sunday he might do so. “I don’t want to leave my successor a dirty barn,” he said on CBS . “I want to clean the barn up a little bit before the next person gets there.”

Any issues left hanging after Mr. Boehner’s departure will pose an even greater problem for his successor, likely Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R., Calif.). The new speaker will take the gavel at a time when the most popular Republican presidential candidates are echoing the criticisms of congressional GOP leaders that poisoned Mr. Boehner’s reputation and strategy with many Republican voters.

Keep reading.

Anne-Marie Slaughter on CBS 'This Morning'

Actually, CBS should be having Ms. Slaughter's husband on, Professor Andrew Moravcsik, who's out with a new piece at the Atlantic about stay-home dads (or almost stay-home dads, and how they help their wives' careers).

See, "Why I Put My Wife’s Career First." And note that he's a privileged Princeton professor, who's basically got his own European welfare state beneath him, including the personal wealth to afford a private nanny. The program he's proposing is totally unrealistic for most regular husbands in the United States. But ahh, that's progressivism for you.

Now, to Ms. Slaughter, who's got a new book out tomorrow, Unfinished Business: Women Men Work Family.

Keurig K130 Brewing System

At Amazon, Brews one 8-ounce cup in under three minutes, Single-use water reservoir - Mug sensor - No accidental spills, No glass pots to clean, break or crack - Easy cleaning and maintenance - No coffee grounds or wet, messy filters.

Plus, The Original Donut Shop Regular, Keurig K-Cups, 72 Count.

And for your coffee reading companionship, James Jones, From Here to Eternity.

Excitement Builds in American League West Wild Card Race

At Sports Illustrated, "Astros close gap with Rangers to set up exciting finish to AL West, wild card."

Watch, "9/27/15: Keuchel's gem leads Astros to series win."

And the Angels remain 1/2 game back in the hunt. And they'll be in Arlington October 1-4 to close the season, a series with obvious playoff implications.

The Lovely Evelyn Taft's Forecast

She's really showing.

At CBS News 2 Los Angeles, "Evelyn Taft's Weather Forecast (Sept. 28)."

Life on Mars?

NASA's expected to make a major announcement. Is there evidence of water on Mars?

At CBS News This Morning, "Mars mystery solved? NASA to reveal major discovery."

And at the Guardian UK, "Water on Mars? The buildup to Nasa's 'mystery solved' announcement – live."

Dana Loesch's Birthday Today, and She's Standing Strong

Another day, another batch of death threats for Dana Loesch --- this time including a blood-spattering snuff video.

See the Blaze, "Anti-Gun Advocate Reimagines Dana Loesch’s NRA Ad With Shocking, Sick Ending — but He Surely Didn’t Expect TheBlaze TV Host to Respond Like This."

It's Dana's birthday today, so please go ahead and tweet her some birthday wishes. She's a good lady.

And here's her book, Hands Off My Gun: Defeating the Plot to Disarm America.

Lenin and Stalin Look-Alikes

Shoot, these guys would go over well right here in the U.S. of A.!

At the Wall Street Journal, "In Moscow, Lenin and Stalin Look-Alikes Jostle for Tourists’ Cash":

MOSCOW—In the shadow of the Kremlin, Joseph Stalin and Vladimir Lenin clashed over how to divvy up the spoils of their little enterprise.

Lenin felt he wasn’t getting a fair share, while Stalin’s apparent grievance was his erstwhile comrade’s betrayal in forming a new alliance—with another Stalin.

A dozen or so impersonators—who specialize in duping dictators—work the crowds near Red Square, jostling for cash from tourists’ wallets. A photo with Ivan the Terrible, for instance, can cost anywhere from 200 rubles (about $3) to 1,000 rubles, depending on the visitor’s negotiating skills.

The dispute between the two leaders of the global proletariat late June ended in a scuffle, according to city officials and other impersonators, exposing the seamier side of capitalism around Moscow’s main tourist site.

Lenin impersonator Igor Gorbunov said the Stalin look-alike, Latif Valiyev, followed him into an underpass near Red Square and jabbed him in the back with an umbrella. Mr. Gorbunov went to a first-aid station before filing a complaint to police. Law enforcement looked into the incident, but Mr. Gorbunov later said he had forgiven Mr. Valiyev and withdrawn his complaint.

Mr. Valiyev denied having a conflict with his fellow dictator—and demanded payment to answer any further questions.

Look-alikes began to appear on Red Square in the mid-1990s as capitalism took hold and Russia opened up to tourists. “Fat Lenin” was the first, according to Sergei Solovyov, a 57-year-old Lenin impersonator, aka “Tall Lenin.” Six Stalins and eight Lenins, mostly known by their nicknames, now work the square.

“White Lenin” has a pale face; “Wooden Lenin” doesn’t say much; “Gay Lenin” stands with an impersonator of the poet Alexander Pushkin; “Drunk Lenin” likes a tipple.

Other famous political figures, such as Tsar Nicholas II, Karl Marx and even a President Barack Obama, have come and gone. But the favorite Bolsheviks have staying power.

“It’s hard work to be on your feet all day,” said Mr. Solovyov. “It’s also morally hard. People shout: ‘Burn in hell! What have you done with Russia?’”

Oh, I'm sure that have quite a few fans, not least of all, American neo-communist looking to earn some bona fides visiting the Lenin mausoleum.

Still more.

Outsiders Surge in New Poll

Especially Republican outsiders. I don't consider Bernie Sanders an outsider. His surge is based in his unabashed socialism, which is catching the Obama disaffecteds.

At WSJ, "Carson, Fiorina, Sanders Gain Ground in Their Parties’ Primary Races, Poll Shows":

Republicans Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina and Democratic Sen. Bernie Sanders have gained significant ground in their parties’ presidential primary races in recent weeks, the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll finds.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and real-estate developer Donald Trump continue to lead the fields for their parties’ nominations. But Mr. Trump is now essentially tied with Mr. Carson, and significant movement has occurred among candidates just behind them. Mr. Carson is backed by 20% of GOP primary voters, compared with 21% for Mr. Trump. Mrs. Fiorina and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, both have 11% support. Other Republicans register single-digit support.

In the prior Journal/NBC News poll, conducted in mid-July, Mr. Carson had only 10% support, compared with 19% for Mr. Trump. The retired neurosurgeon overtakes Mr. Trump in the new survey, conducted Sept. 20-24, when voters’ first choice is combined with their second.

No candidate in the race has enjoyed a swifter ascent than Mrs. Fiorina, who barely registered in the July survey. She has since taken the spotlight in the GOP race after a strong performance in a televised Sept. 16 candidate debate.

Some 28% of Republican primary voters picked her as their first or second choice in the September survey, up from 2% in the July poll.

By contrast, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush lost the most altitude since the prior Journal/NBC News survey.

Some 7% of Republican primary voters named Mr. Bush as their top pick for the GOP nomination, down from 14% in July and 22% in June.

Like Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Bush was an early front-runner whose pedigree and famous last name is proving to be as much of a liability as an asset. The former Florida governor boasts the biggest war chest in the field, but his continued slippage has donors nervous at a time when candidates with little or no experience in politics have stolen the spotlight.

Mr. Bush, however, said on Fox News Sunday that he remains confident he’ll win in New Hampshire, the state that holds the first primary in February. He noted his campaign just began an advertising offensive.

“It is a marathon,” he said. “These polls really don’t matter.”

Still more.

Sunday Cartoons

At Flopping Aces, "Sunday Funnies."



And at Randy's Roundtable, "Friday Nite Funnies," and Theo Spark's, "Cartoon Roundup..."

Cartoon Credit: Legal Insurrection, "Branco Cartoon – All Options Are on the Table."

Third GOP Debate Sets Off Wave of Anxiety

From Hadas Gold, at Politico, "The prospect of a reduction in the number of candidates on stage is a life-or-death matter for some campaigns":

The uncertain terms of the next Republican debate are setting off a wave of anxiety among middle and bottom tier campaigns, with several lashing out at the Republican National Committee for failing to provide clarity on how many candidates will appear on stage.

The campaigns fear the entry criteria for the Oct. 28 debate is being designed to reduce the number of candidates on stage for the third primetime debate -- a life-or-death matter for White House hopefuls on the bubble.

While the RNC doesn’t set the rules, it does have a voice in working with the networks running the debates. The committee has not said how many candidates will be allowed into the primetime debate, which will be held in Boulder, Colorado, and broadcast on CNBC. Nor are there any indications there will be an undercard event, as there have been in the first two debate showdowns of the primary season.

“With the next debate a month away, it is maddening that the RNC has yet to provide any guidance to campaigns regarding the criteria that they and CNBC plan to use to exclude candidates,” said Curt Anderson, an adviser to Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, who appeared in both undercards. In the spin room after CNN recent debate, Jindal spokesperson Gail Gitcho said they already had plans to speak with CNBC in order to keep Jindal on the stage.

Well, it's not just Jindal who's freaking, but keep reading.

Amber Lee's Got Your Low Pressure Forecast

At CBS News 2 Los Angeles:

Watch, "Amber Lee's Weather Forecast (Sept. 27)."

We're Losing the War, Do Something

From Michael Ledeen, at Forbes:

We are living in revolutionary times, but we are burdened with counterrevolutionary leaders. The old order, the bipolar Cold War world, is pretty much gone, but the outlines of a new paradigm have not yet emerged. None of the leaders on “our” side of the world, aside from our president, has any sort of vision for the next stage, the new paradigm, and his vision is based on antipathy for American leadership. He will not challenge the Russian/Iranian/Chinese/North Korean/Cuban etc. war against us.

Ergo things are going to get worse, perhaps very much worse. The pols and pundits could help focus our minds by seeing the war being waged against us, and then figuring out how to win it...

Beautiful Model Nadia Menaz Killed Herself Because She 'feared her devout Muslim parents were going to force her into arranged marriage...'

From Susan Goldberg, at Pajamas, "Muslim Model Hangs Herself to Avoid Arranged Marriage."

And at the Mirror UK, "Model found hanged 'feared her devout Muslim parents were going to force her into arranged marriage'."

And Instapundit quips, "I’d criticize this sort of thing, with the arranged marriages, the honor killings, and so on, but 'that’s their culture'."

‘Birth Tourism’ Booming In Bay Area Despite Fed Crackdown

At CBS News 2 San Francisco, "Word on the street here is that the crackdown down south has pushed many of the operations up north."

Jonathan Papelbon Attacks Bryce Harper in Dugout Fight (VIDEO)

Not good to see, ever.

Watch, at WaPo, "Jonathan Papelbon goes after Bryce Harper in dugout."

Also on Twitter, "Jonathan Papelbon attacking Bryce Harper?"

A Realist Grapples with His Doubts on Intervention in Syria

From the far-left, Israel-bashing Harvard political scientist Stephen Walt, at Foreign Policy, "Could We Have Stopped This Tragedy?":

Unlike neoconservatives, who never admit error no matter how often they are wrong, I spend a fair bit of time thinking about whether my diagnoses of key world events have been off the mark. (For examples of this sort of “self-criticism,” see here, here, and here.) I’ll stand by the vast majority of what I’ve written in my scholarly work and my FP commentary, but I find it useful — indeed, necessary — to occasionally ponder whether I got something wrong and, if so, to try to figure out why.

Case in point: the increasingly awful situation in Syria. Ever since the initial protests broke out, I’ve believed this conflict was not of vital strategic interest to the United States and that overt U.S. intervention was likely to cause more harm than good. What has emerged since then is a relentless and gut-wrenching tragedy, but I’ve uncomfortably concluded that my original judgment was correct. And yet I continue to wonder.

To be sure, the Obama administration has not handled Syria well at all.

President Barack Obama erred when he jumped the gun in 2011 and insisted “Assad must go,” locking the United States into a maximalist position and foreclosing potential diplomatic solutions that might have saved thousands of lives. Second, Obama’s 2012 off-the-cuff remark about chemical weapons and “red lines” was a self-inflicted wound that didn’t help the situation and gave opponents a sound bite to use against him. The president wisely backed away from that position, however, and (with Russian help) eventually devised an arrangement that got rid of Assad’s chemical arsenal. This was no small achievement in itself, but the whole episode did not exactly inspire confidence. The administration eventually agreed to start a training program for anti-Assad forces, but did so with neither enthusiasm nor competence.

And consider what has happened since then. More than 200,000 people are now dead — that’s approaching 100 times as many victims as 9/11 — and numerous towns, cities, and villages have been badly damaged, if not destroyed. There are reportedly some 11 million displaced people either internally or out of the country, about half Syria’s original population. A flood of refugees and migrants has landed in Europe, provoking a new challenge to the European Union’s delicate political cohesion and raising the specter of a sharp increase in right-wing xenophobia. The carnage in Syria has also helped fuel the emergence and consolidation of the so-called Islamic State, intensified the Sunni-Shiite split within Islam, and put additional strain on Syria’s other neighbors.

Given all that, is it possible that those who called for swift U.S. intervention several years ago were right all along? If the United States, NATO, the Arab League, or some combination of the above had established a no-fly zone and stood ready to intervene with ground forces, might the Assad regime have fallen quickly and spared Syria and the world this bleak and open-ended disaster? Or might these steps have given outside powers greater leverage over the situation, put some serious teeth into the early diplomatic efforts, and made some sort of brokered political solution more likely?

Maybe.

We cannot replay the past to see where a different course of action would have led, but one cannot rule out a priori the possibility that a prompt, forceful, and committed international response would have produced a better outcome in Syria than what we observe today. If everything had gone just right, we might be viewing a pacified Syria as a big success story, much as proponents of humanitarian intervention now view NATO’s role in the Balkans in the 1990s...

Hmm... Not so easy for Walt to admit that he's wrong.

America's "vital national interests" have certainly been compromised by the administration's Syria disaster. At this point Walt and other leftists can only define "vital national interests" in existential terms, as the very survival of the United States. But that's not a very useful definition, and U.S. foreign policy has long taken a much larger stand on securing vital interests, which has included preventing hostile foreign powers from securing dominant spheres of interest in a region or country, like Russia in Syria.

But keep reading. Walt's not so open to correcting his errors after all.

Kwikset and Baldwin SmartKey Door Locks

At Amazon, Shop Home Improvement - 10-20% Off Select Kwikset and Baldwin SmartKey Door Locks.

Plus, from Katheryn Russell-Brown, The Color of Crime: Racial Hoaxes, White Fear, Black Protectionism, Police Harassment, and Other Macroaggressions.