'North Dakota has shed its identity as an agricultural state in decline to become an oil powerhouse second only to Texas...'

This is the marquee front-page report at today's New York Times, "The Downside of the Boom."

It's interesting, although caveat emptor. If the Old Gray Lady can smear and destroy the Bakken oil boom, they certainly will. As with any major economic development, folks need to find a nice compromise between private-sector growth and public-sector regulation. As it is right now, it sounds pretty Wild West and laissez-faire.

Israel Reconsiders Military Action Against Iran

An Israeli preventive attack on Iran? Wouldn't that be something else?

At Israel Matzav, "The military option is back on the table."

A lot of factors would have to come together just perfectly for Israel to be able to pull off such a strike. See Whitney Raas and Austin Long, "Osirak Redux? Assessing Israeli Capabilities to Destroy Iranian Nuclear Facilities," International Security (Spring 2007).

Indianapolis Star Pulls Allegedly 'Racist' Thanksgiving Cartoon

An outrage over accuracy. Wow, haven't seen that happen before.

At iOWNTHEWORLD REPORT, "This Cartoon Was Scrubbed By the Indianapolis Star":

Also at Twitchy, "IndyStar, ‘newspaper of record for all #Crackerland,’ pulls ‘appallingly racist’ Varvel cartoon." And here's the newspaper's apology, "We erred in publishing cartoon."

@jjauthor Guess who's coming to dinner? http://t.co/BpvRnf2qD4 @UniteRight @DailySignal @DavidLimbaugh pic.twitter.com/uxuovG6AZE

— varvel (@varvel) November 21, 2014

Jennifer Lawrence Sings 'The Hanging Tree'

Just got back from "Mockingjay Part I."

It's good. Really good. Makes me think.

In any case, here's London's Daily Mail, "Listen to Jennifer Lawrence sing The Lumineers' song The Hanging Tree for The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Pt. 1."

Obama 'Dangerously Close to Totalitarianism'

At IBD:

Is Obama 'Dangerously Close To Totalitarianism'? http://t.co/iQjSCke1IP … #IBDEditorials via @IBDinvestors - pic.twitter.com/Mwh40v3RPf

— Daniel John Sobieski (@gerfingerpoken) November 22, 2014

Given the president's end-runs around Congress, his shredding of the Constitution and his assault on the authority of the courts, a second term free of electoral restraints may be a frightening prospect.

Judge Andrew Napolitano, a Fox News commentator, raised the question on Neil Cavuto's "Your World" show Wednesday. And while it seems fanciful in light of the safeguards built into our democracy and its institutions, it recognizes the threat posed by the president's policies and actions if left unchecked.

"I think the president is dangerously close to totalitarianism," Napolitano opined. "A few months ago he was saying, 'The Congress doesn't count, the Congress doesn't mean anything, I am going to rule by decree and by administrative regulation.'

"Now he's basically saying the Supreme Court doesn't count. It doesn't matter what they think. They can't review our legislation. That would leave just him as the only branch of government standing."

Dana Loesch Gives Emperor Amnesty a Lesson in Scripture

At Twitchy, "Dana Loesch gives Pres. Obama a scripture lesson":

Obama missed this Scripture in his immigration talk: Romans 13:1. Also Titus 3:1.

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) November 21, 2014

Here are the passages. Romans 13:1:

Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

And Titus 3:1:

Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good...

Maybe the president should name a Bible czar to help him out of the tricky predicament he’s put himself in with his selective quoting of verse to fit his political agenda?

Islamic State Gains Support in Pakistan

This is truly a nightmare omen for trends in global terrorism. The world's worst terror state throwing its weight behind the world's newest source of Islamic terrorism.

At the New York Times, "Allure of ISIS for Pakistanis Is on the Rise":

LONDON — Across Pakistan, the black standard of the Islamic State has been popping up all over.

From urban slums to Taliban strongholds, the militant group’s logo and name have appeared in graffiti, posters and pamphlets. Last month, a cluster of militant commanders declared their allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the self-proclaimed caliph of the Islamic State.

Such is the influence of the Islamic State’s steamroller success in Iraq and Syria that, even thousands of miles away, security officials and militant networks are having to reckon with the group, also known as ISIS or ISIL.

Its victories have energized battle-weary militants in Pakistan. The ISIS brand offers them potent advantages, analysts say — an aid to fund-raising and recruiting, a possible advantage over rival factions and, most powerfully, a new template for waging jihad.

Although the Islamic State is not operational in Pakistan, just its symbolic presence is ample cause for concern. It is there, after all, that Al Qaeda was founded in the 1980s, followed by other extremist ideologies that easily found the means and support to carry out international attacks...

More.

Background Checks Abandoned in the Left's Open-Borders Executive Amnesty Push

From Michelle Malkin, "Refresher course: When White House promises immigration “background checks,” they lie."

The Realist Creed

A nice piece. Well done.

From Robert Kaplan, at Real Clear World.

Forget Assault Prevention: Dispensing Common Sense Advice Puts You at Risk of 'Victim-Blaming'

From Ashe Schow, at the Washington Examiner, "Colleges struggle with protecting students without being accused of victim-blaming."

Leftists put people in danger. Sad.

Deep Denials, Missed Chances on Newtown Murderer Adam Lanza

This makes me sick. Nancy Lanza especially. She practically deserved to die for her gross negligence toward her son's psychiatric care.

At LAT, "New report on Newtown shooter: Parental denial, breakdowns, missed opportunities":

In February 2007, Yale clinicians identified in Adam Lanza what they believed were profound emotional disabilities and offered him treatment that could give him relief for the first time in his troubled life.

But Adam was angry and anxious, and he didn't want to go. His mother, Nancy Lanza, constantly placating her son, was inclined to pull away from the treatment, prompting a psychiatric nurse to reach out to his father, Peter Lanza, in an urgent email.

"I told Adam he has a biological disorder that can be helped with medication. I told him what the medicines are and why they can work. I told him he's living in a box right now and the box will only get smaller over time if he doesn't get some treatment."

Nancy Lanza rejected the Yale doctors' plan. Adam was 14.

Six years later, Adam, now an emaciated recluse and fixated with mass killers, murdered his mother and massacred 20 children and six educators before turning a gun on himself at the elementary school he once attended in the Sandy Hook section of Newtown.

A report released today by the Office of the Child Advocate pointed to the Yale episode as one of dozens of red flags, squandered opportunities, blatant family denial and disturbing failures by pediatricians, educators and mental health professionals to see a complete picture of Adam Lanza's "crippling" social and emotional disabilities.

While the report does not draw a line between the events in Adam Lanza's young life and the massacre, it points out repeated examples where the profound anxiety and rage simmering inside Lanza was not explored in favor of attempts to manage his symptoms.

For example, at the apex of Adam's increasing phobias and problems coping with middle school, he went to a pediatrician and was repeatedly prescribed a lotion to soothe hands rubbed raw by excessive washing and a laxative to ease constipation brought on by a dangerous loss of weight. Yet, the authors note that there was no effort during these visits to address the underlying causes. A visit to a hospital emergency room was cut short before there was a chance for clinicians to explore Adam's problems at greater depth and schedule him for long-term treatment because Nancy Lanza said that being at the hospital was making Adam anxious.

"This shooting could have been stopped at any point along the trajectory of (Adam Lanza's) life," said Scarlett Lewis, whose son Jesse was one of the first-graders killed in classrooms in the Sandy Hook School.

"Red flags were evident, yet procedures were not in place to effectively deal with the issues. This is a systemic concern," Lewis said.

Lewis has started a foundation in her son's honor called the Jesse Lewis Choose Love Foundation to create and promote social and emotional learning programs for school-aged children.

More.

VIDEO: An Imperial Presidency

From the Republican National Committee:

Obama Hecked During Amnesty Speech in Las Vegas

You gotta love it.

Indeed, I turned on the TV this afternoon just as Emperor Obama was getting blasted by these assholes.

Sweet.

At National Review, "Never Enough: Immigration Activist Heckles Obama During Amnesty Victory Lap."

Immigration Debate Explodes Despite Voter Desire for Change

Well, you think?

At the Los Angeles Times:

Far from settling matters, President Obama’s unilateral action on immigration all but ensures at least two more years of fierce and angry debate over one of the most contentious and polarizing issues facing the country.

It is a debate that presents opportunity and political risk to both parties, but especially Republicans, who are deeply divided among themselves and badly need to mend relations with a Latino and Asian American population growing bigger and more politically powerful each day.

And, with the loudest, most strident voices likely to dominate the discussion, it is a debate that will continue to mask a broad consensus among Americans, who want compromise and a fix to a decades-old problem — fashioned by Congress and the president working in tandem — rather than more of the partisan brick-throwing that has escalated over the past several days.

Exit polls this month found that nearly six in 10 voters supported legislation that would go further than Obama’s plan by establishing a path to citizenship for the roughly 11 million people in the country illegally — a striking ratio for a largely white, GOP-leaning electorate that swept Republicans to power across the country on Nov. 4.

Even here in Arizona, a state known for taking one of the hardest lines on illegal immigration, there is a strong desire to see the political skirmishing end.

“People want a solution,” said Chuck Coughlin, a GOP strategist who has advised two of the state’s top Republicans, Sen. John McCain and Gov. Jan Brewer, who have sometimes worked at cross-purposes on the issue. “They’re tired of the partisan stalemate and the finger-pointing by both sides.”

Immigration is a uniquely difficult and emotional issue, freighted with the weight of family ties and two broad, sometimes conflicting impulses. The United States, as the president suggested in his speech Thursday night, is both a land of laws and a nation of immigrants; squaring that circle and finding agreement somewhere in the middle has exceeded both the imagination and capacity of elected leaders for a generation.

Obama was never going to placate all sides by going it alone, a move he says was forced upon him by hostile, intransigent Republicans in Congress. What he has done, though, has heightened tensions in the short term and cast the conflict forward into the race to succeed him, placing every White House hopeful on the spot for the next two years.

Because Obama’s actions are not binding on his successor “the next president is going to have to decide whether to continue these policies after 2017,” said Matt Barreto, a University of Washington political scientist who conducts extensive polling among Latinos nationwide. “Whether it’s Hillary Clinton or Chris Christie or Marco Rubio, they’re all going to have to take a position, because it’s a policy that the next president, through his or her executive power, will be overseeing.”

The danger Democrats face is alienating the white working-class voters who have never much cared for the president and who could view the influx of newly hirable immigrants as unwelcome job competition.

Moreover there are voters of all stripe who recoil from the notion of rewarding — or at least excusing — those who break the law, which is how many critics portrayed the outcome of Obama’s single-handed move...

Still more.

Obama's Executive Amnesty is Both Abuse of Power and Failed Policy Reform

At WSJ, "I, Barack":

His unilateral order will encourage more migrants to come in hope of a future amnesty, without matching the ebb and flow of migration to America’s changing labor market demands. His order also offers no prospect of future citizenship, creating a laboring class with less of a stake in American institutions—and less incentive to assimilate.

The politics of immigration is already fraught, and Mr. Obama’s order will make it worse. He is empowering the most extreme anti-immigrant voices on the Republican right, which may be part of his political calculation.

Mr. Obama wants Democrats to get political credit with Hispanics for legalization, while goading the GOP into again becoming the deportation party in 2016. Hillary Clinton would love that, which explains why Bill Clinton is already backing Mr. Obama’s order. Mark this down as one more way in which this President has become the Great Polarizer.

***
The polls show the American people are uneasy about Mr. Obama’s unilateral law-making, and liberals should be too. Mr. Obama is setting a precedent that Republican Presidents could also use to overcome a Democratic majority. How about an order to the IRS not to collect capital-gains taxes on inflated gains from property held for more than a decade? That policy would be broadly popular and also address a basic lack of fairness.

Mr. Obama’s rule-by-regulation has already been rebuked more than once by the Supreme Court. His “I, Barack” immigration decree is another abuse that will roil American politics and erode public confidence in the basic precepts of self-government.

RTWT.

Kenneth Turan Reviews 'The Hunger Games: Mockingjay — Part 1'

A good review, although having to wait a year for a conclusion to the trilogy is a buzz-killer.

At LAT, "Review 'The Hunger Games: Mockingjay — Part 1' is just a place-holder."

And watch, "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1 Final Trailer – “Burn”."

I'm taking my younger son to see it tomorrow.

A Dangerous Move by the President

From David Gergen, at CNN, "Obama's dangerous move on immigration":

One can argue whether this executive order is legal, but it certainly violates the spirit of the founders. They intentionally focused Article One of the Constitution on the Congress and Article Two on the president. That is because the Congress is the body charged with passing laws and the president is the person charged with faithfully carrying them out.

In effect, the Congress was originally seen as the pre-eminent branch and the president more of a clerk. The president's power grew enormously in the 20th century but even so, the Constitution still envisions Congress and the president as co-equal branches of government -- or as the scholar Richard Neustadt observed, co-equal branches sharing power.

For better or worse, Americans have always expected that in addressing big, tough domestic issues, Congress and the president had to work together to find resolution.

For a president to toss aside such deep traditions of governance is a radical, imprudent step. When a president in day-to-day operations can decide which laws to enforce and which to ignore, where are the limits on his power? Where are the checks and balances so carefully constructed in the Constitution?

If a Democratic president can cancel existing laws on immigration, what is to prevent the next Republican from unilaterally canceling laws on health care?

A bad way to start with new Congress

Coming on the heels of midterm elections that were a clear call for a change of course in Washington, starting in the White House, this is also a discouraging way to open the final years of this presidency. A new Wall Street Journal/NBC poll finds that by 53-40%, Americans feel positive about the election results; by 56-33%, they want Congress to set policy for the country, not the President; by 57-40% they favor a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants but by 42-32%, they disapprove of Obama overhauling immigration through executive order. Why isn't the White House listening to the public?

In retrospect, it would have been far better if coming out of the elections, the President had said he had promised he would act through executive order before the end of the year, but in light of the election results, he would work with the new Congress for six months. If there were no legislation, he would act on his own.

That would have been a much fairer proposition, would have started out with Republicans on better footing, and would have rallied the public behind him if the GOP refused to cooperate.

Sadly, we instead have an action from the White House that will cast a dark shadow over prospects for legislative cooperation, falls short of what the immigrant population had hoped and steers us into deep, unknown waters in our governance.

Tom Hanks Interview on 'CBS This Morning'

He's made a lot of great movies.

A good guy too, despite his leftist inclinations.

Here, in two parts: "Tom Hanks: Being an actor was a solitary pursuit," and "Tom Hanks: 'I was not intimidated by being the new kid'."

High-Tech Presents for Students

At Amazon, Shop Amazon's Electronics Holiday Gift Guide - High-Tech Presents for Students.

Blacks Arrested Up to Ten Times More

This is interesting, despite the leftist spin.

From Brad Heath, at USA Today, "Racial gap in U.S. arrest rates: 'Staggering disparity'":

When it comes to racially lopsided arrests, the most remarkable thing about Ferguson, Mo., might be just how ordinary it is.

Police in Ferguson — which erupted into days of racially charged unrest after a white officer killed an unarmed black teen — arrest black people at a rate nearly three times higher than people of other races.

At least 1,581 other police departments across the USA arrest black people at rates even more skewed than in Ferguson, a USA TODAY analysis of arrest records shows. That includes departments in cities as large and diverse as Chicago and San Francisco and in the suburbs that encircle St. Louis, New York and Detroit.

Those disparities are easier to measure than they are to explain. They could be a reflection of biased policing; they could just as easily be a byproduct of the vast economic and educational gaps that persist across much of the USA — factors closely tied to crime rates. In other words, experts said, the fact that such disparities exist does little to explain their causes.

"That does not mean police are discriminating. But it does mean it's worth looking at. It means you might have a problem, and you need to pay attention," said University of Pittsburgh law professor David Harris, a leading expert on racial profiling.

Whatever the reasons, the results are the same: Blacks are far more likely to be arrested than any other racial group in the USA. In some places, dramatically so.

At least 70 departments scattered from Connecticut to California arrested black people at a rate 10 times higher than people who are not black, USA TODAY found.

"Something needs to be done about that," said Ezekiel Edwards, the head of the ACLU's Criminal Law Reform Project, which has raised concerns about such disparate arrest rates. "In 2014, we shouldn't continue to see this kind of staggering disparity wherever we look."

The unrest in Ferguson was stoked by mistrust among black residents who complained that the city's police department had singled them out for years. For example, every year, traffic stop data compiled by Missouri's attorney general showed Ferguson police stopped and searched black drivers at rates markedly higher than whites.

A grand jury is considering whether Officer Darren Wilson should face criminal charges for shooting a teen, Michael Brown. Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon declared a state of emergency Monday as authorities braced for more unrest after the grand jury's decision is announced.

Such tensions are not new. Nationwide, blacks are stopped, searched, arrested and imprisoned at rates higher than people of other races. USA TODAY's analysis, using arrests reported to the federal government in 2011 and 2012, found that those inequities are far wider in many cities across the country, from St. Louis to Atlanta to suburban Dearborn, Mich...

More.

House Republicans Hire Law Professor Jonathan Turley for #ObamaCare Lawsuit

This is interesting.

At IBD, "Turley Joins Republican Challenge to Obama's Lawlessness."

Also at Turley's blog, "TURLEY AGREES TO SERVE AS LEAD COUNSEL FOR HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE."

RELATED: "Obama's Executive Amnesty Threatens Constitutional Crisis."

Young Immigrants' Amnesty May Not Extend to Parents

Oh, the perilous path of Democrat Party identity politics.

At the New York Times, "Deportation Reprieve May Not Include Parents of Young Immigrants":

WASHINGTON — Every time Berzabeth Valdez heads out to work from her mobile home on the outskirts of Houston, it crosses her mind that she might not come back.

Ms. Valdez, 48, is a Mexican immigrant who has been living in Texas for 11 years without legal papers, and so without a driver’s license. For her commute to her job as a restaurant manager, she keeps her taillights in working order and never speeds.

“We are terrified of the police,” Ms. Valdez said. “One traffic ticket could end in deportation. I could lose my whole life, everything I have gained for my family.”

One of Ms. Valdez’s daughters grew tired of living with those fears and joined an organization of young undocumented immigrants. The youths, who call themselves Dreamers, won protection from deportation from President Obama in 2012 and continued to press him to extend those measures to others here illegally.

​On Thursday, ​Mr. Obama ​will announce changes to the immigration enforcement system that ​will allow as many as five million immigrants to remain and work legally. But ​the youths ​will face a bittersweet ending, ​because White House officials have decided to leave out their parents, according to advocates familiar with the plans.

“It’s getting so hard to call my mom,” said María Fernanda Cabello, 23, Ms. Valdez’s activist daughter. “I’ve had to tell her, ‘There is a victory coming, and I don’t know if you’re part of it.’ ”

​Mr. Obama ​​will grant ​deportation reprieves to undocumented parents whose children are American citizens and legal permanent residents​ ​if they have lived in the country for five years​​ and have not committed serious crimes, administration officials said. ​Officials say the president can exercise prosecutorial discretion to avoid breaking up families of children entitled to be in the country and to steer enforcement agents toward deporting criminals and foreigners who pose national security threats. ​

But ​some​ senior​ ​administration ​officials have argued that it would be more difficult both legally and politically to make the case for including parents of immigrants in the existing program for young people who came when they were children, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. Since that program is based on executive action by Mr. Obama, the youths have deportation deferrals and work permits but no green cards or any other visa or formal immigration status, which only Congress can confer. Their parents’ claim for relief is weaker, the officials said.

The president is facing angry opposition from Republicans to his new initiatives. Calling Mr. Obama’s plans “executive amnesty,” Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, an outspoken adversary, accused him of seizing sole power to decide who can live and work in the United States. “Surrendering to illegality is not an option,” Mr. Sessions said.

Republicans are considering different ways to stop funding for the president’s new measures and for the existing DACA program.

Even after receiving their own reprieves, the youths played a large role in bringing a reluctant president to take more sweeping action unilaterally. They mobilized law professors to build Mr. Obama’s legal case. Early this year, when the president was urging activists to pressure Republicans in the House to take up an immigration bill passed by the Senate, young immigrants decided there was little chance the House would act. Instead, they dogged Mr. Obama, interrupting his speeches and staging street sit-ins at his events.

The hints that their parents could be excluded by the White House have stunned many youths.

“It’s really hard to process when we’ve been pushing so hard for this,” said Ms. Cabello, an organizer in Texas for United We Dream, a national network of youth groups. “I cry every time I think about it.”

The White House ​will ​expand the current DACA program by eliminating the age cap for eligibility, which now excludes those over 30, or adjusting other requirements, measures youth leaders said they would welcome.

According to estimates by the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan research organization, about 3.3 million undocumented parents have children who are citizens or legal residents and have been living here for at least five years. Many families have some children born in other countries and some who are citizens born in the United States, and the number of eligible immigrants would increase only to 3.4 million if the parents of youths in the DACA program were included.

But for young people in families with no American-born children, it is bitterly frustrating that they have to continue to worry whenever their parents go out the door.

In October, Ms. Valdez recalled, her car was rammed in a rear fender while she was stopped at a red light. An apologetic American driver explained that she was wearing a new pair of high heels and had been unable to press the brake in time.

“Let’s just forget about it,” Ms. Valdez said, eyeing her crumpled fender, and she left to avoid calling the police...

PREVIOUSLY: "Forty-Eight Percent Oppose Obama's Executive Amnesty for Illegal Aliens," and "Barack Broke That — Democrats Now in Worse Shape Than Before Obama Took Office!"

Two-Thirds Say U.S. Is On Wrong Track Post-Midterms, Poll Shows

More from that new NBC/WSJ poll, "'Like It Never Happened': Public Shrugs at Midterm Results, Poll Shows."

PREVIOUSLY: "Forty-Eight Percent Oppose Obama's Executive Amnesty for Illegal Aliens."

Alessandra Ambrosio Arm Workout

Just a few weeks now until the fashion show.

Dems Take Hard Left Turn After Losses

Very hard.

From Chris Stirewalt, at Fox News:

It would have cost Senate Democrats little to have given Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., a win on the Keystone Pipeline. After all, the president could have blown off the vote with an insurmountable veto, citing the need to protect executive prerogatives. So it seemed odd when the White House got coy ahead of the vote about the president’s veto threat. When the time came, though, we saw why: Team Obama had successfully whipped against the Landrieu bill. There was little chance that Landrieu was going to win her Dec. 6 runoff whatever the outcome, but with the Hail Mary turning into a Fail Mary, the seat is signed, sealed and delivered for the GOP. Democrats, led by the White House, ate one of their own rather than defy the orthodoxy of the party’s liberal base. That’s strong evidence that Democrats currently care more about ideological purity than electoral expediency. And that is always a dangerous thing.

*****

An audacious, confrontational approach to the midterm defeat is very much in vogue among Democrats, especially liberal firebrands who believe that a more concentrated version of the party’s ideology would have given more reason for inert coalition members to get to the polls. What the president heard from the two thirds of adults who did not vote was that they wanted more, more, more of his agenda. He started with global warming last week, but in the coming days will turn to immigration. As recent polling has shown, that won’t go over very well. Democrats may blame their inability to motivate their base for a painful midterm cycle, but anything seen as “big” could be very dangerous for a party that is approaching the vanishing point with the blue-collar white voters that once formed its core.

More.

Adriana Lima Screencaps for Pirelli Calendar 2015

At Egotastic!, "Adriana Lima for Pirelli, Start Your Engines, Gentlemen Oglers."

Barack Broke That — Democrats Now in Worse Shape Than Before Obama Took Office!

The f-ker's drunk on executive power and he couldn't give a whack about what happens to the Democrat Party. He's gonna have his way or the highway.

So just watch: Top Democrats --- starting with Hillary Clinton --- are going to abandon Obama with a vicious alacrity. He's destroying the party and the Republicans just need to keep playing it on the straight and narrow, not overreaching, keeping their eyes on the prize of 2016.

Man, life is beautiful.

At Politico, "Democrats to Obama: You broke the party, now fix it":

Enough, Donna Brazile told White House political director David Simas the day after the midterms.

Democrats are in worse shape than when President Barack Obama came into office — the number of seats they have in Congress, the number of governors, a party approval rating that’s fallen behind Republicans for the first time in recent history, enthusiasm, energy. The White House, Brazile said when she came to meet with Simas, has got to focus for the next two years on getting the party into better shape, and Obama’s the best and most effective person to get out the message.

As much Hillary Clinton anticipation as there is, two weeks later, Democrats are still reeling and anxious. Obama may have built his political career without the party — and created anti-establishment alternatives — but he’s a lame duck with a new Congress that’s been elected to oppose him. He needs Democrats. And they need him.

“The base craves his leadership,” Brazile said in an interview later that week, following a meeting of the DNC committee that’s beginning to set the rules for the next presidential nomination. “They want him in the mix, talking about what Democrats accomplished, what Democrats are fighting for, and what the president has done to make lives better.”

Nancy Pelosi was reelected minority leader. So was Harry Reid. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s term at the DNC isn’t up until 2017.

Obama said repeatedly before and after the votes were counted that he wasn’t going to fire anyone because of election results. But if no one’s going to take the blame for 2014, Democrats are hoping he’ll take responsibility for getting things better for 2016.

“He may or may not be the best messenger,” said Vic Fazio, the former California congressman who was the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair for the 1994 rout. “But at this point, he is still our messenger. And the first year is very important.”
At least until the next presidential campaign begins in earnest, Democrats say, it’ll be up to Obama to centralize the Democratic message around something other than simply trying to paint the Republicans as extreme.

Interviews with leading party strategists turn to three main suggestions: Obama should be a much more frequent and strong voice on Democratic priorities, he should transform his West Wing political office from a midterm clearinghouse to an instrument for true party outreach, and he should reinvest his energy in the Democratic National Committee — including seeking a full-time chair who can begin the major clean-up and overhaul they need ahead of 2016.

And if doing it for the party isn’t enough for Obama, Democrats say, do it out of self-interest.

“A strong party is the key to a lasting legacy,” said a senior Democratic strategist. “Whether it’s for our ideals as Democrats or it’s for his personal legacy — if we lose the White House and continue to get gutted down ballot, they will repeal the ACA and everything else we’ve fought so hard for, and all of this will be for naught.”

That should be a short-term worry for Obama too, Brazile said.

“The Republicans have not retreated from the battlefield, so why should President Obama surrender?” she said. “He can’t give up, he can’t waver. All of that looks to Democrats like he doesn’t stand for much, and it’s not the truth.”

Keep reading.

Forty-Eight Percent Oppose Obama's Executive Amnesty for Illegal Aliens

From the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, at WSJ, "Obama Faces Skeptical Public on Immigration Action — WSJ/NBC Poll."

More from Noah Rothman, at Hot Air, "NBC poll: Executive amnesty is… pretty unpopular with just about everybody."

And ICYMI, "Obama's Agenda Threatens to Divide the Democratic Party."

Immigration's gonna be a anchor on a lot of Democrat Party election prospects in 2016. But hey, it's all about the legacy!

Senate Democrats Throw Mary Landrieu Under the Anti-Keystone Bus

From Susan Davis, at USA Today, "Senate defeats Keystone XL pipeline."



More at Memeorandum.

Obama's Agenda Threatens to Divide the Democratic Party

And The One couldn't care less. It's all about legacy at this point. The way things are going, he's not going to have much of one come 2017.

From Josh Kraushaar, at Nation Journal, "Obama's Agenda Threatens to Divide the Democratic Party."

NFL Concussion Settlement

What a story, at the Los Angeles Times, "For some, NFL concussion settlement proposal is yet another injury."

And check Mike Webster's entry at Wikipedia.

'Come on people now, smile on your brother...'

Hey, folks, try to love one another while I'm slaving away today.

Sending out the love to Mastic, New York.

Peace brother. Eat all you want. This one's for you babe!

Via the Sound L.A.

At the video, Jesse Colin Young, Stephen Stills, Jackson Browne, Graham Nash et al. --- at the "No Nukes" concert, Battery Park, New York, 1979. According to this archive report (via the Tribeca Trib):

On Sept. 23, 1979, two years before construction of Gateway Plaza began, a crowd of 200,000 converged on the landfill for an "anti-nuke" rally. Prompted by the partial meltdown of the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant, the gathering was the biggest demonstration since the Vietnam War.

And at People, "From Bruce to Bonnie, the Hottest Acts in Rock Warm Up the No-Nuke Crusade."

Take Me to the River
Talking Heads
8:50 AM

Happy
The Rolling Stones
8:48 AM

Twist and Shout
The Beatles
8:43 AM

FAME
DAVID BOWIE
8:39 AM

Don't Stop
Fleetwood Mac
8:36 AM

No One Like You
Scorpions
8:32 AM

Get Together
The Youngbloods
8:18 AM

Surrender
Cheap Trick
8:14 AM

Caught Up in You
38 Special
8:09 AM

Love Is a Battlefield
Pat Benatar
8:04 AM

Free Ride
The Edgar Winter Group
8:01 AM

Special Deals in Sports and Outdoors

At Amazon, Shop Amazon Outdoors - 25% Off Select Coleman Campaign & Hiking Gear.

The Best Photos of the USS George H.W. Bush's Homecoming

Sweet.

At the Daily Signal.

Obama 'Has Destroyed the Credibility' of His Administration

Ron Fournier lets loose, on yesterday's Special Report:

Pushing Back Against Feminist Bullies

From Mollie Hemingway, at the Federalist, "It’s Time to Push Back Against Feminist Bullies":

It’s not just women who are hurt by feminist bullies. Everyone is. That’s because human relationships are harmed in the toxic outrage culture. The very perpetuation of humanity relies on men and women getting along well. People who stoke resentment and anger between the sexes, or create false claims about women’s oppression, are making it more difficult for happy, healthy, human relationships to flourish.

Well, leftists pretty much destroy everything they touch, but read the whole thing. She's mad about this, for good reason.

Violent Far-Left Extremists Likely to Exploit Race Riots After Ferguson Decision, FBI Warns

This is wild.

Usually, the federal government's warning us about violent "right wing tea party extremists." So this is a change of pace.

At Gateway Pundit, "FBI: #Ferguson Decision ‘Will Likely’ Lead to Violence – Electrical & Water Treatment Plants Targeted."



Also at ABC News (via Memeorandum), "FBI Warns Ferguson Decision ‘Will Likely’ Lead to Violence By Extremists Protesters":

The FBI bulletin expresses concern only over those who would exploit peaceful protests, not the masses of demonstrators who will want to legitimately, lawfully and collectively express their views on the grand jury’s decision.

The bulletin “stresses the importance of remaining aware of the protections afforded to all U.S. persons exercising their First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.”

Within hours of the FBI issuing its bulletin, some police departments across the country issued their own internal memos urging officers to review procedures and protocols for responding to mass demonstrations.

Still, the bulletin’s conclusions were blunt: “The FBI assesses those infiltrating and exploiting otherwise legitimate public demonstrations with the intent to incite and engage in violence could be armed with bladed weapons or firearms, equipped with tactical gear/gas masks, or bulletproof vests to mitigate law enforcement measures.”

The bulletin cites a series of recent messages threatening law enforcement, including a message posted online last week by a black separatist group that offered “a $5,000 bounty for the location” of Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson, who fired the shots that killed Brown on Aug. 9.

In interviews with ABC News, police officials said their departments have identified a number of agitators who routinely appear at mass demonstrations.

“How many of those sympathizers are actually sympathizers?” Rick Hite, the chief of the Indianapolis Metropolitan police department, wondered. Many of them see the protests as a way to “chime in with their own personal agenda,” he said.

In its new intelligence bulletin, obtained by ABC News, the FBI says “exploitation” of mass demonstrations “could occur both in the Ferguson area and nationwide.”

More.

Assassinating the Leader of Islamic State Is a Meaningful Step Toward Destroying the Group, Insiders Say

At National Journal.

Actually, there's some evidence in the scholarly literature that leadership targeting doesn't work. See, Jenna Jordan, "Attacking the Leader, Missing the Mark: Why Terrorist Groups Survive Decapitation Strikes." A great piece of research.

Shop for Thanksgiving Dinner

At Amazon, Shop Amazon - Thanksgiving Dinner and Desserts - Prepare the Perfect Feast.

Fumiko Hayashida, Among First Japanese American Internees, Dies at 103

A tragic, yet fascinating, story, at LAT, "Fumiko Hayashida dies at 103; among first Japanese American internees."

Interesting obit: Fumiko Hayashida, 103, one of the 1st Japanese Americans in internment camps http://t.co/LGdtXRFOlx pic.twitter.com/TpuzUauGjM

— Lauren Raab (@raablauren) November 16, 2014

Dead Democrat Walking

Heh, that has a nice ring to it, especially the "dead Democrat" part.

 VIDEO: "The Atlantic's Molly Ball: Mary Landrieu Is a 'Dead Democrat Walking'."

4 killed, 15 Hurt in Chicago Shootings from Saturday Afternoon Into Early Sunday Morning

Chicago, the model of leftist gun control effectiveness (not).

At the Chicago Tribune, "4 killed, 15 hurt in city shootings":

Three men and a woman died and at least 15 people, including seven teenagers, were wounded in shootings across the city from Saturday afternoon into early Sunday morning.

In the latest fatal shooting, a 27-year-old man died after being shot around 3:15 a.m. Sunday in the Old Town neighborhood on the Near North Side, said Chicago Police Department spokesman News Affairs Officer Hector Alfaro.

The man was found inside a vehicle in the 400 block of West Evergreen Avenue with multiple gunshot wounds, Alfaro said. The car he was in crashed into several parked cars before coming to a stop.

He was taken to Northwestern Memorial Hospital, where he was pronounced dead, Alfaro said...

RELATED: At Town Hall, "Despite Gun Sales Being Banned in Chicago, Police Superintendent Still Blaming Lack of Gun Control For Violence."

Islamic State's Most Barbaric Video

Not more barbaric, actually.

They just showed more of the barbarity than they usually do.



PREVIOUSLY: "Peter Kassig: Poor Bastard."

'I've never given them money, in case you're wondering why they send me email...

That's Ann Althouse, in a disclaimer on the idiotic email she received from NARAL Pro-Choice America: "'We just learned that TIME magazine apologized for including 'feminist' on their poll of words to ban. What a victory!'"

Seriously.

Breakfast at 8:33am, Brunch at 9:10am, and Lunch at ... Hell, Repsac Eats Every Hour on the Freakin' Hour!

Because eating is so fundamental you've got to stuff your fat face every time the minute-hand strikes twelve.

Damn, Reppy, stuff that bride mofo! She deserves a reward for you rolling on top of her and smothering her flat, ftw!

And dude, you better up those fitbit stats before it's too late! It's for the children! Wait, no, you don't have any children. Well, it's for revolution!

The weekly shop, 'cause eating is fundamental. (with Kate at Stop & Shop) — https://t.co/zdgfnpjjw9

— Walter James Casper (@repsac3) November 16, 2014

Brunch with my bride, 'cause shopping deserves a reward. (with Kate at Mastic Sports Deli) — https://t.co/7aj4dmKyOc

— Walter James Casper (@repsac3) November 16, 2014

New Holiday Deals Every Day

At Amazon, Shop Amazon's Electronics Holiday Gift Guide - New Deals Every Day.

Leftist Baloney

From William Voegeli, at National Review, "Liberal Bullshit":

Conservative critiques of liberalism sometimes concede that liberals’ aspirations are laudable before insisting that the means liberals favor are insufficiently practical and at least potentially destructive. The way liberal compassion lends itself to liberal bullshit, however, argues for a less forgiving interpretation. Liberals’ ideals make them more culpable, not less, for the fact that government programs set up to do good don’t reliably accomplish good. Doing good is often harder than do-gooders realize, but doing good is also more about the doing and the doer than it is about the good. Too often, as a result, liberals are content to treat gestures as the functional equivalent of deeds, and intentions as adequate substitutes for achievements.

That's a snippet of Voegeli's book, The Pity Party: A Mean-Spirited Diatribe Against Liberal Compassion.

Sunday Cartoons

At Flopping Aces, "Sunday Funnies."

#RedMeat #PJNETMT @peddoc63: Voters pushed you off plank! GOP - Not time 4compromise! #MakeItRight pic.twitter.com/aQ9jCneaW7

— Judy Stines (@jstines3) November 14, 2014

Also at Randy's Roundtable, "Friday Nite Funnies (The Very Late Edition!)," and Reaganite Republican, "Reaganite's Sunday Funnies."

Still more at Legal Insurrection, "Branco Cartoon – The Miserable Monster," and Theo Spark, "Cartoon Round Up..."

Mitt Romney on 'Face the Nation': Obama, Dude, You Lost the Midterms

Obama "poking a stick in the eye" of Republicans is "not a good idea."

Yeah, Obama's got to learn that "he's lost this election," heh.

Bob Schieffer 'Dumbstruck' by Jonathan Gruber's Brutal Honesty, LOL!

Even good old Bob Schieffer is gobsmacked --- gobsmacked I tell you --- by the audacity of the honesty of Jonathan "Stupid Americans" Gruber!

You gotta love it!

43 Dartmouth Students Suspected of Cheating In Ethics Class Designed for Athletes

Ethics schmethics!

At Instapundit, lol.

Ellison Barber and Sharyl Attkisson on #GruberGate

Sweet ladies --- and smart!



And ICYMI, "#ObamaCare Architect Exposes Progressive Totalitarianism — And Repsac's Too!"

Smokin' Rule 5 Sunday — Democrat Dishonesty and Denial Edition!

I could do "Democrat Dishonesty and Denial" roundups 24/7, but this oughta hold us for awhile, lol.

President Obama is emphatically claiming that his administration did not, in fact, mislead the American people on ObamaCare. Noah Rothman has the rundown, "Gruber-gate gets to Obama: ‘No, I did not’ mislead Americans." (Via Memeorandum.)

In this regard, the President's no better than the most dishonest and venal leftist fever-swamp trolls, like Scott Lemieux of Lawyers, Lies and Grubbing. Patterico has the smackdown in the leftist liar Lemieux, "Fun with Scott Lemieux on Halbig, " and "I F*cked Up, I Trusted Scott Lemieux."

Yeah, well, you never want to "trust" those deranged f-ks at LGM. Never.

But enough about leftist lies and derangement. Bring on the beautiful babes!

Okay, see Pirate's Cove, "Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup," and "If All You See……is a sea that has flooded liberal cities hundreds of feet, you might just be a Warmist."

Also at the Other McCain (from last week, "Rule 5 Sunday: Flowtation."

More at Goodstuff's, "GOODSTUFFs BLOGGING MAGAZINE (164th Issue)."

Animal Magnetism has "SATURDAY GINGERMAGEDDON."

Also from Ms. EBL, "Space exploration, Sexism, Feminism and Fashion Rule 5."

Also at First Street Journal, "Rule 5 Blogging: Sea Duty."

At Knuckledraggin', "Noon Titty Squish," and "Somebody’s getting a nice homecoming."

And at Fishwrapper, "Katy Perry’s naughty photos (and huge breast) have leaked… damn!"

More at the Chive, "Emma Watson goes topless… sweet baby Jesus!"

At Maggie's Farm, "Saturday morning links."

From Bob Belvedere (the consummate breast-master), "On Saving America — What to Do?"

More at Classy Bro, "13 Reasons Why We Love Dat Gap."

At 90 Miles From Tyranny, "Morning Mistress."

And from Blackmailers Don't Shoot, "#ShirtGate Rule 5: Chicks in Space!"

In a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World has the "Friday Pinup."

The Hostages, "Big Boob Friday."

And at Odie's, "EXCELLENCE ~OR~ Rule 5 Woodsterman Style."

Finally, from Doug Hagin, "DALEYGATOR DALEYBABE JESSI MALAY."

Peter Kassig

Poor bastard.

Thought by going to Syria he'd be performing some noble humanitarianism. Instead, they doffed off his bloody head.

At Atlas Shrugs, "New Islamic State VIDEO shows beheading of US hostage Kassig."

And at Bare Naked Islam, "Peter Kassig, American aid worker in Syria beheaded by ISIS Islamic State (WARNING: Graphic Video)." The caption at the video page reads:

Islamic State murder video of 18 Syrian soldiers in a brutal and deliberately cruel fashion as the camera stares into the eyes of the condemned. The video production is smooth and a moment is taken to quash any idea that this is a “fake video” as ‘Jihadist John’ looks into the camera mid beheading with a menacing full metal jacket stare.

More at Telegraph UK, "Peter Kassig may have defied captors' demand to film propaganda video before he was murdered."

The Lies That Are Central to Obama's Agenda

From Kyle Smith, at the New York Post:

What’s important about [Jonathan] Gruber’s words is that they highlight the fact that ObamaCare isn’t just “controversial” or “divisive” or “hotly debated.” It is fraudulent. Being based on lies, it is illegitimate.

Word.

But RTWT (via Memeorandum and RCP).

#Shirtstorm: Glenn Reynolds' Column on #Shirtgate Brings out the Leftist Crazy

At Twitchy:

Heh. Shrinkage: More charges of 'doxxing' by Instapundit 'downsized' by accuser http://t.co/yJKfEEBC1e Leftists are simpletons straight up.

— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) November 16, 2014

Jonathan Gruber's 'Stupid' Budget Tricks

The totalitarian progs are all, "Nothing to see here. Move along!"

But see WSJ, "His ObamaCare candor shows how Congress routinely cons taxpayers":

#GruberGate basically: a) Exposed Obama as a liar b) Gave the supreme court the underpinnings to gut #Obamacare in the spring.

— RockPrincess (@Rockprincess818) November 16, 2014

As a rule, Americans don’t like to be called “stupid,” as Jonathan Gruber is discovering. Whatever his academic contempt for voters, the ObamaCare architect and Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist deserves the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his candor about the corruption of the federal budget process.

In his now-infamous talk at the University of Pennsylvania last year, Professor Gruber argued that the Affordable Care Act “would not have passed” had Democrats been honest about the income-redistribution policies embedded in its insurance regulations. But the more instructive moment is his admission that “this bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies.”

Mr. Gruber means the Congressional Budget Office, the institution responsible for putting “scores” or official price tags on legislation. He’s right that to pass ObamaCare Democrats perpetrated the rawest, most cynical abuse of the CBO since its creation in 1974.

In another clip from Mr. Gruber’s seemingly infinite video library, he discusses how he and Democrats wrote the law to game the CBO’s fiscal conventions and achieve goals that would otherwise be “politically impossible.” In still another, he explains that these ruses are “a sad statement about budget politics in the U.S., but there you have it.”

Yes you do. Such admissions aren’t revelations, since the truth has long been obvious to anyone curious enough to look. We and other critics wrote about ObamaCare’s budget gimmicks during the debate, and Rep. Paul Ryan exposed them at the 2010 “health summit.” President Obama changed the subject.

But rarely are liberal intellectuals as full frontal as Mr. Gruber about the accounting fraud ingrained in ObamaCare. Also notable are his do-what-you-gotta-do apologetics: “I’d rather have this law than not,” he says.

Recall five years ago. The White House wanted to pretend that the open-ended new entitlement would spend less than $1 trillion over 10 years and reduce the deficit too. Congress requires the budget gnomes to score bills as written, no matter how unrealistic the assumption or fake the promise. Democrats with the help of Mr. Gruber carefully designed the bill to exploit this built-in gullibility.

So they used a decade of taxes to fund merely six years of insurance subsidies. They made-believe that Medicare payments to hospitals will some day fall below Medicaid rates. A since-repealed program for long-term care front-loaded taxes but back-loaded spending, meant to gradually go broke by design. Remember the spectacle of Democrats waiting for the white smoke to come up from CBO and deliver the holy scripture verdict?

On the tape, Mr. Gruber also identifies a special liberal manipulation: CBO’s policy reversal to not count the individual mandate to buy insurance as an explicit component of the federal budget. In 1994, then CBO chief Robert Reischauer reasonably determined that if the government forces people to buy a product by law, then those transactions no longer belong to the private economy but to the U.S. balance sheet. The CBO’s face-melting cost estimate helped to kill HillaryCare.

The CBO director responsible for this switcheroo that moved much of ObamaCare’s real spending off the books was Peter Orszag, who went on to become Mr. Obama’s budget director. Mr. Orszag nonetheless assailed CBO during the debate for not giving him enough credit for the law’s phantom “savings.”

Then again, Mr. Gruber told a Holy Cross audience in 2010 that although ObamaCare “is 90% health insurance coverage and 10% about cost control, all you ever hear people talk about is cost control. How it’s going to lower the cost of health care, that’s all they talk about. Why? Because that’s what people want to hear about because a majority of Americans care about health-care costs.”

More.

And see Gateway Pundit, "BOOM! Gruber White House Meeting Included CBO Director, Robert Gibbs, Axelrod and Barack Obama."

BONUS: "#ObamaCare Architect Exposes Progressive Totalitarianism — And Repsac's Too!"

Teens and Young Adults Don't Want to Work

My first response to seeing this polling data is that it's simply incomprehensible. But then, thinking about it for a minute, there are all kinds of variables that would contribute to a decreasing desire to work among young (and very young Americans). Either way, this is a terrible development for American society.

At Pew Research, "More and more Americans are outside the labor force entirely. Who are they?":

But let’s look in particular at the youngest part of the eligible workforce. The share of 16- to 24-year-olds saying they didn’t want a job rose from an average 29.5% in 2000 to an average 39.4% over the first 10 months of this year. There was a much smaller increase among prime working-age adults (ages 25 to 54) over that period. And among people aged 55 and up, the share saying they didn’t want a job actually fell, to an average 58.2% this year.

'This isn’t gender neutrality, this is women upset that men can stand and pee...'

"This is going to turn me into an activist."

 Heh, at iOTW REPORT, "Leftist Idiocy – Retrofitted Gender Neutral Bathrooms Are Blocking the Urinals With Tape."

Big Cat on the Loose in Paris

Apparently, it's not a tiger. But still.

At Telegraph UK:

Soldiers called in to help hunt for the Disneyland Paris "tiger", with fresh paw prints spotted after beast apparently crossed a major highway and slinked past a petrol station.

Police and soldiers hunting for a large cat believed to be on the loose near Paris have shut down a motorway service station after the beast was spotted there a day after it was first seen near the Disneyland theme park.

Motorists were warned to be extra vigilant on the busy A4 motorway after a driver first spotted what he described as a “wandering animal” before dawn on Friday at the service station.

Paw prints believed were later found on the grounds of the service station.

However, the National Office for Hunting and Wildlife said it is not a tiger but some other sort of (as yet unidentified) feline. They base their statement on analysis of its paw prints.

More at London's Daily Mail, "Camera footage captures big cat stalking across a car park near Disneyland as police marksmen continue hunt for 'aggressive and adventurous animal'."

U.S. Fuel Costs Drop to Historic Lows, Thanks to Shale Oil Boom — And No Thanks to Obama!

According to the Los Angeles Times, increased U.S. energy production, resulting from the shale boom, is forcing a structural change in U.S. energy markets, that --- along with decreased demand --- could result in a long-term decline in fuel costs.

And keep in mind, consumers and business owners have more disposable income with lower energy costs, which in turn boosts spending in other areas, like recreation and job hiring. (Oh, and of course the federal and state governments would raise much more in tax revenues from higher business earnings and job growth, which would reduce pressure to raise taxes --- but don't expect idiot progs to be touting these benefits any time soon).

In sum, a policy focus on expanding the U.S. energy sector would be a huge boom for Americans across the board. Instead, President "I'll Bankrupt the Coal Industry" Obama is looking to crush the energy sector in favor of a climate change legacy for his administration.

Americans opened their eyes to this abuse on November 4th, and if the Dems don't change their ways, they'll be looking at another ass-kicking in 2016.

In any case, see the Los Angeles Times, "Gasoline prices continue to drop":

How low can gas prices go?

In Southern California — and across the country — prices have been dropping for months, placing extra dollars in consumers' wallets. This week the average price for a gallon of regular hit $3.24 in Los Angeles and Long Beach, the lowest in four years, according to AAA. In Orange County, it was $3.19.

Energy analysts say it may go lower.

"We could see gasoline prices in the high 2s," said Amy Myers Jaffe, executive director of energy and sustainability at UC Davis.

Several factors are likely to get prices there, Jaffe said.

Oil production in the United States — driven by the nation's shale oil boom — is increasing. And on the demand side, the sluggish global economy has sent the price of crude steadily down.

In the U.S., where growth has been stronger, demographics and consumer habits are putting downward pressure on demand, analysts said...

The current decline is partly seasonal...

But the nation's shale oil boom should help drive down prices in 2015 across the state, with average prices potentially falling below $3 once next year's summer driving season ends, Kloza said.

"It's going to be a sloppy year next year for oil," he said. "On balance, crude oil prices should be the lowest they've been in four or five years."

The rise in oil production has been so great that the U.S. Energy Information Administration now predicts average daily production in 2015 will reach the highest level since 1972.

Low fuel prices have been a boon to consumers' pocket books, especially working- and middle-class Americans for whom gas accounts for a significant portion of their paychecks.

When prices were around $4 a gallon, Rita Mena paid as much as $80 to fill her Ford Explorer.

On Friday, at an Arco gas station in Boyle Heights, she shelled out $60.

With the extra money, the 32-year-old said, she can buy more of the things she needs, like groceries or diapers for her 2 1/2-year-old daughter, Leilani.

Then there's the luxuries.

"I want to go out more now," said Mena, who works at a downtown L.A. health clinic. "And maybe I could pick up an extra present or something for Christmas."

PREVIOUSLY: "The Geopolitical Consequences of the Shale Revolution."

ICYMI: John Nagl, Knife Fights

Get your copy at Amazon, Knife Fights: A Memoir of Modern War in Theory and Practice.

Francoise Boufhal #Rule5

A real sweetie, via Twitter:

Francoise Boufhal @Onlybadchicks @S2nningBabes @johnnywalkeryyc @Fan_Of_Glamour @US_GlamourFan @onlyhotgirlzz #beauty pic.twitter.com/zWrZaSH7lE

— BABEIMPACT (@babeimpact) October 14, 2014

More on Donald Sutherland

He's a bleedin' lefty, but I think he's onto something about the "youth revolution."

More from Gentleman's Quarterly:

Donald Sutherland's epic Hollywood life and career. The GQ &A: http://t.co/5bku2tjkWH pic.twitter.com/MzIjMqHd7D

— GQ Magazine (@GQMagazine) November 15, 2014

Air-Sand Battle: Force Size, Land-Air-Sea Balance, and the Fight Against #ISIS

I love this piece.

From Kate Brannen, at Foreign Policy, "The fight against the Islamic State is forcing the Pentagon to rethink its plans for the future of warfare":

The  fight against the self-proclaimed Islamic State is still in its early days, but already it is challenging the Pentagon's assumptions about where and how war will be fought and what the military will need to be prepared.

The conflict in Iraq and Syria represents the type of war the Obama administration has tried to relegate to history. The days of fighting protracted ground wars in the Middle East were supposed to be over. Instead, the White House directed the Pentagon to turn its attention to the Asia-Pacific region, where it's believed by some that high-tech weapons systems belonging to the Air Force and Navy could be optimized in a more conventional fight.

But with new conflicts and pockets of violence and instability rapidly cropping up in places such as Ukraine, the Middle East, and parts of Africa, defense policymakers are being forced to revisit, if not rethink, some of the assumptions that underpin today's strategy and resource decisions.

Among the ideas under scrutiny are the relevance of ground forces and whether state actors pose the most dangerous threat to the U.S. homeland and global security.

For the military services, the debate over these assumptions will directly affect their size, budget, and the types of weapons they buy.

For senior military leaders, the issue of the Islamic State, also known as ISIS and ISIL, "is as much about where the services are headed as it is about the problem to solve," said David E. Johnson, a military analyst at Rand who from 2012 to 2014 directed the Army's Strategic Studies Group for Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno.

The Pentagon has laid out a strategy that accepts greater risk in the ground forces so that more resources can be poured into the Air Force and Navy -- the services that play the biggest role in the Asia-Pacific region. A smaller ground force is also believed to be necessary due to escalating personnel costs at a time when the defense budget is shrinking.

As part of this plan, the Army is continuing to shrink from a wartime high of 570,000 active-duty soldiers to today's 505,000, with the goal of dropping to 490,000 by the end of 2015. And even deeper cuts are likely to come; the Army is expected to downsize to 420,000 soldiers if Congress doesn't undo the automatic budget cuts known as sequestration planned for 2016.

The assumption behind these troop reductions is that the United States won't fight large-scale, protracted ground wars like it has in Iraq and Afghanistan anytime soon. And although no one is recommending inserting large-scale U.S. ground forces into Iraq -- the current cap is 3,100 "non-combat" troops -- events there and in Ukraine are providing the Army support for its argument that it is too risky to make the Army much smaller than it already is.

"I think there is a sense by many in the Army of, 'Hey, we told you you've been engaging in some degree of wishful thinking and we think we're getting growing evidence that we're not talking about hypotheticals,'" said Maren Leed, a senior advisor to Odierno from 2011 to 2012 who is now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "It's ISIS, it's Ebola, it's Russia. Name your problem, ground forces matter."

Meanwhile, the other services are arguing, "You can do it with us and with other people's boots," she said...

More.

PHOTO CREDIT: Wikimedia Commons.

#ObamaCare Architect Exposes Progressive Totalitarianism — And Repsac's Too!

But hey, "Gruber Shmuber," right?

All the leftist lies, deceit, and tyrannical corruption are fine and dandy, as long as it provides a few victims of "capitalist oppression" access to ObamaCare!

Newly Insured Through Exchanges Give Coverage Good Marks http://t.co/tMazy4D6zs / Gruber Shmuber. THIS is what matters.

— Walter James Casper (@repsac3) November 14, 2014

Well, maybe not.

See Bruce Thornton, at FrontPage Magazine:

Professor Jonathan Gruber of MIT, who designed the Affordable Care Act, used to be the symbol of the Democrats’ technocratic bona fides, and an example of how big government with its “scientific” experts can solve social and economic problems from health care to a warming planet. Yet a recently publicized video of remarks he made at a panel in 2013, along with 2 other videos in the same vein, has now made him the poster child of the elitist progressives’ contempt for the American people, and their sacrifice of prudence and reason to raw political power.

In the video Gruber explains the spin and lies the Dems used to give cover to their Congressmen so they could vote for Obamacare. Especially important was avoiding the “t-word.” So, Gruber crows on the video, “This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure [the Congressional Budget Office] did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies.” He also explained how the bills’ writers covered up the obvious redistributionist core of the legislation, which to work has to take money from the healthy young to pay for health care for the sick and old. “If you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in — you made explicit healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed.”

Then this handsomely paid consultant to the “most transparent administration in history” revealed the foundational contempt progressives have for the “people” whose champions they claim to be: “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass.” As David Horowitz tweeted, “Progressive totalitarianism: We know what’s good for you and will lie, cheat and then compel you to agree with us.”

This modern version of the Platonic “guardians,” who possess superior knowledge but who must camouflage their tyrannical rule with lies, is now over 100 years old, and has become deeply embedded in our politics. It was the fundamental assumption of American Progressivism, which argued that modern technology and social change had rendered the old constitutional order a dangerous relic....

The politics of today’s progressives all have their roots in the old Progressive assumptions––that enlightened elites know better than the people what is good for them, and that the people, being such unenlightened clods, need to be manipulated and lied to for their own good. Most important, the freedom and autonomy of the people must be limited by intrusive federal agencies and regulations in order for these utopian goals to be achieved.

Or to put it in other terms, this set of progressive beliefs––which we have seen acted on for the last six years by the president and practically every government agency––is totalitarian at its core. Not the brutal despotism of Italian fascism or Soviet communism or German Nazism, but Tocqueville’s “soft despotism,” the kinder, gentler Leviathan which undermines self-reliance and self-government by taking responsibility for the people’s comfort and happiness, and financing its largess by the redistribution of property. But no matter how comfortable in the short-term, such a condition is nothing other than servitude. And as Tocqueville warns, “No one will ever believe that a liberal, wise, and energetic government can spring from the suffrages of a subservient people.”

Repsac's a fascist asshole, so it's easy to see why he's all "Gruber Shmuber" at this outlandish revelation of the massive Obama-Democrat lies, hypocrisy, and jack-boot authoritarianism. It's what he's all about.

Climate Change Made Simple

From Stephen Green, at Pajamas Media:

If we’re just going to jack up energy prices to make ourselves feel good in the name of “doing something,” fuggidaboudit. Cheap energy promotes production, it promotes trade, it promotes mobility — three of the keys to American prosperity. Any permanent “skyrocketing” of energy prices would condemn millions, perhaps billions of people to lives of continued poverty. Or condemn them to death.

Assuming we can safely determine that the coming climate change would be bad for us, we then move on to the question of how and why the change is coming. Is it due to sun cycles? Carbon emissions? Hyperintelligent Wampa terraformers from ice planet Hoth? Some combination of factors? This is a vital question, and the models only provide answers based on the untested assumptions of the programers.

But let us now assume that we know bad change is a-comin’ and that we know what’s causing it. Now we have to do something, right? Not so fast there, pardner. If it turns out carbon emissions are actually helping keep things warmer and better than they otherwise would be, it would be a mistake to play into the Hothians icy hands by reducing those emissions. But until we know, we don’t know. Ignorance is neither bliss nor a basis for swift action...

More.

Dr. Matt Taylor and the Absurdity of Modern Feminism

If by chance you haven't seen the mewling, bawling apology, it's here, "Rosetta comet scientist D.r Matt Taylor apologises for shirt."

Now, at Twitchy, "‘Slutshirt shamed’! ‘Feminist bullies’ just made a comet scientist cry over his ‘sexist’ shirt."

http://t.co/SjaYHf54zY feminist bullies have made the guy who landed a spacecraft on comet cry and apologise for a harmless shirt

— Milo Yiannopoulos (@Nero) November 14, 2014

And here's Glenn Reynolds' response, "1 small shirt for a man, 1 giant leap backward for women."

And that's followed by Ann Althouse's fisking, "Did feminists make the comet landing all about clothes?"

Yes, society's pretty much all f-ked up.

As Global Strategic Threats Intensify, U.S. Nuclear Arsenal at Risk of Becoming Anachronism

A lot of problems with the U.S. strategic nuclear force.

At LAT, "Major overhaul of nuclear force planned to improve security and morale."

And also, "As U.S. nuclear arsenal ages, other nations have modernized":

As Russian forces were drawing back from a swift and violent incursion into Ukraine this fall, Moscow was delivering another powerful military statement many miles to the north.

A new 40-foot Bulava intercontinental ballistic missile, capable of delivering an unparalleled 10 nuclear warheads, was launched by a Russian navy submarine on a test run over the icy White Sea. The weapon was a clear signal to the world that as Russia battles tightening economic sanctions intended to block Moscow's aggressive posturing on NATO's frontiers, President Vladimir Putin has another card to play.

"I want to remind you that Russia is one of the most powerful nuclear nations," Putin declared earlier this year at a state-sponsored youth camp. He reinforced the message last month, inviting the world to "remember what consequences discord between major nuclear powers could bring for strategic stability."

The debate over how to modernize America's aging nuclear forces has taken on increasing urgency with the emergence of a newly assertive Russia and a new generation of nuclear powers with increasing technological sophistication.

North Korea, Pakistan and India all are working quickly to improve their nuclear arsenals and delivery systems. By next year, China is expected to be capable of delivering a nuclear strike anywhere in the continental U.S. for the first time in its history — a threat that Russia has posed for decades.

While the nuclear confrontation between the United States and Russia cooled off after the 1991 fall of the Soviet Union, it has never ended. Indeed, the long-held hope for continual reductions in nuclear forces now seems unattainable, nuclear arms analysts say. For the first time in years, the U.S. and Russia each have increased the number of nuclear warheads deployed over the latest six-month monitoring period — the U.S. by 57 additional weapons and Russia by 131.

Russia is spending $560 billion on military modernization over the next six years with 25% allocated to aging nuclear forces, part of a program to replace all of its Soviet Union-era launchers. U.S. officials say it will take at least $355 billion over the coming decade to upgrade America's nuclear arsenal and keep up with the rearmament spree underway in the rest of the world.

"Our rival powers are investing billions of dollars to modernize and improve their nuclear systems," said Maj. Gen. Sandra Finan, Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center commander, warning that if the U.S. is "to remain credible," it must maintain nuclear preparedness as a priority.

But veterans of the Cold War also say tit-for-tat responses in nuclear confrontation carry grave risks, anchored to erroneous assumptions that a nuclear exchange would leave one side in better condition than the other.

"God help us if we ever need them," said Philip Coyle, a former nuclear weapons scientist, director of nuclear testing, senior Pentagon official and national security adviser.

The U.S. and Russia both continue to field land-based missiles that could be launched in a few minutes, submarine-based missiles able to deliver a devastating counterpunch to any surprise attack, and bombers that could loiter in threatening holding patterns above the Arctic.

A new strategic arms reduction treaty signed in 2010 limits deployed strategic warheads to 1,550 on each side, with a cap of 700 missiles and bombers by 2018. And over the last two decades, nuclear capabilities have been far from the U.S. military's top priority. Most of the attention has gone to high-tech conventional weapons that evolved after the first Gulf War. Two decades have gone by without developing a nuclear strategic weapon.

All the while, U.S. nuclear-capable bombers, submarines, intercontinental ballistic missiles and their launch-control bunkers have been allowed to become virtual Cold War museums.

A fascinating piece.

Continue reading.

ZOO's Favorites

At Zoo Today, "ZOO's favourite babes in a boob-packed compilation video!"

Obama's Executive Amnesty Threatens Constitutional Crisis

If Obama goes for the full 5-million legalization plan, there's going to be hell to pay.

Here's Fox News, "Source: Obama to announce 10-point immigration plan via exec action as early as next week."

Also at LAT, "Going solo on immigration: Obama weighs reform options."

And here's Megyn Kelly's full opening segment last night, which includes comments from Professor Jonathan Turley, who has repeatedly warned against Obama's authoritarian executive actions.