February 14, 2016

AoSHQ Podcast #134: South Carolina Debate


Ace and Drew break down last night's GOP debate.

Listen: Stitcher | MP3 Download
Subscribe: rss.pngRSS | itunes_modern.pngiTunes

Browse (and even search!) the archives

Follow on Twitter

Don't forget to submit your Ask the Blog questions for next week's episode.

Open thread in the comments.

Posted by Andy at 11:13 AM Comments

Sunday Morning Book Thread 02-14-2016: Valentine's Day Edition [OregonMuse]

—Open Blogger

book love.jpg

Good morning to all of you morons and moronettes and bartenders everywhere and all the ships at sea. And to all you young lovers wherever you are, we hope your problems are few. Welcome to AoSHQ's stately, prestigious, internationally acclaimed and high-class Sunday Morning Book Thread. The Sunday Morning Book Thread is the only AoSHQ thread that is so hoity-toity, pants are required. But since today is Valentine's Day, they can be pink.

108 Reading is fundamental: fun and mental!

Posted by: Joe Biden at February 07, 2016 10:07 AM (UBS9M)

Books For Valentine's Day

By the grace of God, I have been married to the lovely Mrs. Muse for over 30 years. I think it's a miracle that she has put up with my BS for that long. One of the things that has helped me reduce the amount of BS I'm pumping into the relationahip is this book, Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus: Practical Guide for Improving Communication by John Gray. Generally, I avoid the pop psychology and self-help stuff, but my pastor recommended it. "Yeah, I know it's not explicitly Christian" he told me, "but read it anyway, it's got some good insights." And he was right, it does. Mrs. Muse read it, too, and we've both benefited. We understand each other better, and what I found amusing was that it helped me in my phone tech support job, particularly in establishing rapport (and trust) with women callers.

And, as an added bonus, this book describes men and women behaving in characteristically masculine and feminine ways, therefore feminists will hate it. As will other sexually maladroit and ignorant progressives who have expanded their revolt against their parents into a full-scale war on reality.

I haven't read, but have been recommended The 5 Love Languages: The Secret to Love that Lasts by Gary Chapman:

Unhappiness in marriage often has a simple root cause: we speak different love languages, believes Dr. Gary Chapman. While working as a marriage counselor for more than 30 years, he identified five love languages: Words of Affirmation, Quality Time, Receiving Gifts, Acts of Service, and Physical Touch. In a friendly, often humorous style, he unpacks each one. Some husbands or wives may crave focused attention; another needs regular praise. Gifts are highly important to one spouse, while another sees fixing a leaky faucet, ironing a shirt, or cooking a meal as filling their "love tank." Some partners might find physical touch makes them feel valued: holding hands, giving back rubs, and sexual contact. Chapman illustrates each love language with real-life examples from his counseling practice.

Of course, both of these books spun off their own little cottage industry of additional books, speaking tours, seminars, etc.

Just for grins, I ran "history of romantic love" through the Amazon search engine, and it came up with

How the French Invented Love: Nine Hundred Years of Passion and Romance by Marilyn Yalom

How the French Invented Love is an entertaining and masterful history of love à la française by acclaimed scholar Marilyn Yalom. Spanning the Middle Ages to the present, Yalom explores a love-obsessed culture through its great works of literature—from Moliere’s comic love to the tragic love of Racine, from the existential love of Simone de Beauvoir and Jean-Paul Sartre to the romanticism of George Sand and Alfred de Musset. A thoroughly engaging homage to French culture and literature interlaced with the author’s delicious personal anecdotes.

This led me to What French Women Know: About Love, Sex, and Other Matters of the Heart and Mind by Debra Ollivier, an American-born Francophile author who, for example,

...pointedly debunks the myth that French women deprive themselves of fattening foods and drink in order to maintain a suitable weight, but reveals that French women are masters of portion control. She...came to the realization that, in France, women genuinely love men, and vice versa; both strive for more compatibility between the sexes, radically diminishing the "battle of the sexes" mentality so commonplace in American society. Intriguingly, Ollivier contrasts the French desire for mystery against the American need for knowledge and control, finding in the discrepancy a possible reason for the ever-escalating American divorce rate.

The problem is that in America, we've got an entire academic discipline (women's studies), which goal is the destruction of marriage, trying to set men and women permanently against each other. Not sure if they have that in France. However, having said this, I think our divorce rate was ridiculously high even before the crybullies and Frankfort School grievance jockeys showed up to throw sand in the social machinery.

Lastly, there's Adult Coloring Books: St.Valentines Sample Patterns: 33 Beautiful, Romantic Stress Relieving Designs. The funny thing is, this is a Kindle book. Now how does that work? When you buy it, it contains a link to a FREE pdf version that you can download and print out.


Nothing to do with books, but I have to repost this comment from yesterday:

152 The Pope needs to give up Communism for Lent.

Posted by: buzzion at February 13, 2016 12:05 PM (zt+N6)

Heh. Not bad for a dead guy.

Continue reading

Posted by Open Blogger at 08:56 AM Comments

EMT 2/14/16 [krakatoa]

—Open Blogger

Sorry. Alarm clock appears to be dead.

On the bright side, I feel much more rested.

Posted by Open Blogger at 07:30 AM Comments

The Ego Has Landed: Why Trump Damaged Himself Tonight


Apologies. I have no idea why I indulged myself to write so long to make such a simple point. Long story short: You can't tell people they've been flat wrong about everything for 17 years, without giving the slightest reason why they should change their entire scheme of thinking, and expect them to support you.

This was a brief line in the podcast (which we'll post tomorrow) which I expanded, for reasons I can now no longer guess, into a 1500 word exegesis on the obvious.

Just skip to the brief update.


The "ego" in the headline doesn't actually refer to Trump's ego, for once. Rather, it refers to the voters' egos.

I think Trump hurt himself badly tonight, enough to knock him out of his first-place standing in most states. Oh he won't completely disappear -- but 2nd Place Trump is not the same thing as Frontrunner Trump.

Trump damaged himself with his claim that Bush lied us into war in Iraq. Not botched the intelligence, not read too much into thin intelligence.

Most Republicans, I think, would agree that that.

No, Trump claimed that Bush deliberately lied us into war.

First, this is alarming because it once again demonstrates that Trump has a conspiratorial mind. It's not enough for the conspiracist to say someone was wrong -- no, they have unrealistically black/white minds, and if you made a bad call, you must have lied.

That conspiracism was always present in his claims about Obama's birth certificate. But that bit of fantasy was about Obama, someone the average Republican voter isn't exactly eager to man the battlements for.

This corker -- this Al Gore roar of quote -- is about George W. Bush, someone still looked upon with affection by most of the party.

Which brings us to the second problem.

If Donald Trump is right, and George W. Bush deliberately schemed with his neo-con advisers to "lie" us into a phony war with Iraq, what does that say about the average Republican voter who supported Bush from 1999, voted for him, defended him through the recount, cried with him on 9/11, agreed with him on Iraq, defended him from ceaseless liberal attacks on him during the war, defended him from Obama's never-expiring "Blame Bush" blame-shifting, etc.?

If Trump is right, then we're not just wrong to have supported him. If Trump's right, we're goddamned rubes and fools to have defended this Actual Hitler-Level Monster for going on 17 years now.

Everyone has an ego. Even Jeb Bush.

The first duty of every ego is to protect itself from attack.

People want to think well of themselves, and they wish to vote in a way that makes them think well of themselves. It's a critical goal in every campaign to convince the public that voting for this candidate is the Smart, Virtuous, Good thing to do, because people will vote in a way that enables them to luxuriate their egos.

That's how Barack Obama got elected. The media convinced people that they became smart and virtuous and good just by voting for this layabout pinko incompetent.

A good leader will challenge people, and that sometimes requires posing a threat to their egos. By telling someone they are wrong-- or at least aren't thinking about things quite straight --one is attacking their ego.

But someone adroit in persuasion understands when he is in fact attacking the core of someone's sense of self-worth, and does so cautiously, deploying all the reason and tactfulness he can marshal into the effort.

He attacks that person's ego to the smallest extent compatible with his goal (changing the person's mind), and offers him good reasons to change his mind.

He thus offers a lateral move, if you will, from one state of self-valuation to another. You give up on this one way of thinking, which would usually cause some psychic strain to the ego, but, on the other hand, you have been convinced of the rectitude of this other way of thinking. By moving to that new way of thinking, you gain a level of self-worth, so you're net even on the deal. (You might even gain some sense of self-worth for having been smart enough to recognize a good argument and having been openminded enough to consider it.)

It is very unpersuasive, on the other hand, to offer someone a flat contradiction of something they've long believed while offering no reason at all to accept a new replacement belief, except the assertion of it.

Abandoning the old position is damaging to one's sense of self-worth -- how could I have gotten it wrong for so long? But no easy glide-path to the new way of thinking is offered.

You sort of have to just knuckle under someone's flat assertion -- and subordinating oneself to another's claims, with no good reasons for such subordination offered, is even more hostile to the ego than being wrong.

Who wants to be someone else's Thought Bitch?

This is a long way of saying Trump specifically and completely contradicted a belief that 75-80% of Republicans have about Bush -- that he was a fundamentally decent man, perhaps overwhelmed by a very difficult period, who made an erroneous decision based on incomplete information -- and instead offered a new belief, that Bush deliberately lied about Iraq's WMD's, a position that 75-80% of Republicans have long not only rejected but have been actively hostile towards.

With no better reason to adopt this new claim other than that Donald Trump said it.

I doubt very much people will be willing to make this leap with Trump. Gathering political support is all about getting a buy-in of belief at a price that people are willing to pay (usually, a low price-- that's why politicians strain to parrot back to you things you already believe).

I think Trump, who has been a past-master at getting people to buy-in to a very low-cost premise -- "Let's Make America Great Again" -- just made a very high cost premise central to buying into him.

And I think for that reason that many people will be taking a second look at Trump -- and not in a good "second look" way. I think they'll be evaluating things they previously gave him passes on -- donations to Hilary, Reid, Pelosi, etc.; support for partial birth abortion; support for single-peer health care-- and re-evaluate those facts while keeping in mind Trump's big new premise that Republicans supported, voted for, defended, and sustained an actual war criminal who made war on a country he knew to be innocent of the claim he dishonestly profferred against it, for who knows what sinister gain.

We'll see if he tries walking this one back, and to what extent he's successful.

If it is now a part of the agenda that we actually have to buy into all the claims Gore, Pelosi, Obama, etc. made for years, I think this new agenda is going to turn out to be too highly priced for most Republican voters.

And Don't Even Get Me Started on Tribal Signaling. I was just telling someone that every campaign boils down to two four word claims:



Dress it up however you like, the subconscious messaging in every election is just that.

I'm on Your side.

He's not like Us.

With just a few poorly chosen angry words, Trump declared a lot of allegiance to the enemy tribe, and essentially said "I'm not like you."

Posted by Ace at 01:53 AM Comments

Overnight Open Thread (13 Feb 2016)


What do you see in the image above? Anything? OK, now shake your head and what do you see?

Continue reading

Posted by CDR M at 10:06 PM Comments

Debate/Obama Statement Thread


So far, Obama's offering a classy statement, and is not stepping on the debate.

Here he goes, with the scumbag part I knew he'd get to. Everything before this was a fig leaf for doing what he wanted to do, which is to get on tv and start politicking.

The debate's on CBS at 9pm Eastern.

Continue reading

Posted by Ace at 08:43 PM Comments

Antonin Scalia: Legacy


I erred by mixing a political impact speculation with a post about the man himself.

This post collects some of his zingiest quotes.

Not only was he very cogent and principled, he was also extremely snarky. He was the judiciary's answer to Deadpool.

Posted by Ace at 07:41 PM Comments

Intellectual Engine of Conservative Court, Justice Antonin Scalia Found Dead of Natural Causes at Texas Ranch


He was 79.

And what comes next, you can only guess. Obviously the goal now is to delay any confirmation of a judge until Obama has safely gone back to Chicago. We'll see if today's GOP can even manage that small bit of resistance.

It is crass to leap to this, but everyone is going to say it so I might as well say it early: as this underlines the great stakes of the Supreme Court, this hurts Trump, and might even wind up boosting the alleged "candidate who can win," Marco Rubio, unfortunately. (Of course it would help Cruz as well-- the question is, which would it help more?)

Events, dear boy. Events.

Why It Hurts Trump: It hurts Trump partly because of concerns about his electability -- his unfavorables remain extremely high, higher than any other candidate (and among the highest unfavorables of any major candidate since pollsters began tracking them).

It also hurts Trump because there is a juicy quote out there where he suggested his sister, a NY State judge and a liberal one, would make a very fine Supreme Court justice.

That quote has gotten a little press, but now it will go into ads. A lot of ads.

Update: Mike Lee's Press Secretary Says No Way In Hell.

Lee is a member of the Judiciary Committee.

The Quote: Trump said his sister would be a "phenomenal" Supreme Court judge, but also said "we will have to rule that out now, at least."

His sister is a pro-choice extremist who finds bans on partial birth abortion to be "semantic" unconstitutional parsings.

Trump will stress the second part of his quote. His opponents, however, will stress the first part.

This will of course be a major issue in tonight's debate. We'll see how it goes.

Recess Appointment? Gabe notes that Obama will try to push someone in in a recess appointment. That makes it important for McConnell to declare pro forma sessions in all off-days, so that the Senate never goes into formal recess.

Posted by Ace at 04:57 PM Comments

Saturday Gardening Thread for a Chile February [Y-not and KT]

—Open Blogger

Good afternoon, gardening horde!

KT's contribution is about chile peppers, which always gets me thinking about New Mexico (referenced in this famous song above), one of my favorite places to visit. I've been to both Taos and Santa Fe for arts festivals. Maybe some year I can check out the Hatch Valley Chile Festival.

I don't have much to contribute this week, so without further ado here's KT...

Continue reading

Posted by Open Blogger at 03:05 PM Comments

The Inaugural Ace of Spades Pet Thread
[L, Elle & Misanthropic Humanitarian]

—Open Blogger

Good day to owners and lovers of pets. Well, you are really not owners you are the ownees. Long time pet owners know of which I speak.

Protecting your pet against heartworm The calendar says it is mid February. At the current time temps are hovering around zero, the ground white and more white stuff predicted. However other parts of the country are warming up and heading into spring. With spring comes the damn mosquito and the possibility of your pet acquiring heartworm. If your pet spends anytime outdoors please consider taking it to the vet for annual blood tests and the preventive meds that are on the market for heart worm.

Continue reading

Posted by Open Blogger at 12:20 PM Comments

How to Argue with People Who Reject The Right To Keep And Bear Arms [CBD]

—Open Blogger

I saw this last month over at The Lid, and a recent discussion with someone who was woefully ignorant of...oh....pretty much everything reminded me of the article. The title says it all:
Three Basic Facts About The Right To Keep And Bear Arms

There are other points to be made, and most of them have been made forcefully and eloquently (and profanely) on these pages. But this is a good beginning.

The U.S. Constitution doesn't grant or create legal rights. It recognizes and protects rights that already inherently exist -- what the Framers called, "inalienable." As such, inalienable rights cannot be created, altered, limited, or removed by man-made laws or governments.
Posted by Open Blogger at 10:45 AM Comments

Open Thread


Even Ulving, "Coastal Landscape in Afternoon Light" (n.d.)

Posted by rdbrewer at 09:52 AM Comments

EMT 2/13/16 [krakatoa]

—Open Blogger

Apologies for the delay

Is it too late to vote in the New Hampshire Primary? I may be within 300 miles of their border in another week.

Posted by Open Blogger at 06:48 AM Comments

Overnight Open Thread (12 Feb 2016)


SMOD can't get here soon enough. Millenials prefer socialism over capitalism. Do they really look at Venezuela and think, man that is awesome! Are they wishing they had a big scoop of that here? Instapundit writes that support for Sanders may not mean full throated support for Socialism, just a search for something different.

the enthusiasm for Sanders may be as much a search for something different as it is an endorsement of Sanders' 1930s-era economic views. Given the failure of the two party establishments, it's not entirely surprising that young people are looking elsewhere.

This foray into socialism won't end well (it never does) when you factor in possible amnesty for folks that have fled socialist leaning countries and you don't try to Americanize them.

Continue reading

Posted by CDR M at 10:00 PM Comments

Damn It Feels Good to be a Clinton


A Cruz ad. Goshdarn, he's so unlikable!

Posted by Ace at 06:46 PM Comments

AoSHQ Podcast #133: Michael Walsh


Ace and Drew interview guest Michael Walsh, author of The Devils Pleasure Palace: The Cult of Critical Theory and the Subversion of the West, which details the Frankfurt School's plan to subvert and destroy all pillars of American civilization (family, school, government, gender) through the relentless critique of Cultural Marxism.

A new low for negativity was reached, so don't miss it!

Listen: Stitcher | MP3 Download
Subscribe: rss.pngRSS | itunes_modern.pngiTunes

Browse (and even search!) the archives

Follow on Twitter

Don't forget to submit your Ask the Blog questions for next week's episode.

Open thread in the comments.

Edited by Ace. Andy was in the right church, but the wrong pew. I changed the description of the Devil's Pleasure Palace.

Posted by Andy at 05:50 PM Comments

Two great MilBlogs (XBradTC)

—Open Blogger

How many of you remember the fantastic Navy blogger Neptunus Lex? Lex was a prolific, and terrific, writer. After his death in 2012, it turned out, the family didn't have his passwords to his account, and so eventually his blog simply went away. Fortunately, one of his readers had saved a fair portion of his posts. And with the permission of his family, one of my coauthors is posting his work on one of my sideblogs. No one is making any money off this. It's simply there to get his works back out in the public sphere. If you were a fan of Lex, you'll love reading the early stuff again. If you never heard of Lex, you're definitely going to want to read his stuff. Even if you're not into MilBlogs, I highly encourage you to read him. He wrote as a human first, and a milblogger second.

Seriously, four years after his death and his community is still growing. What's that tell you about him as a man and a writer?

Read here, at The Lexicans

Next up, TSO at the popular This Ain't Hell wanted to do something special for the Caisson Platoon of The Old Guard at Arlington National Cemetery. The Tomb Guards get all the media attention. But the horse soldiers of the Caisson Platoon do their job day in and day out laying to rest America's finest.

Take a look at some of the supporters of the effort, to include Medal of Honor recipients Sal Giunta, Kyle White and Ryan Pitts.

In less than 24 hours, the TAH community raised more than $3000 to provide a special challenge coin for the platoon and future members.

I was going to ask you to support this effort, but they've already exceeded their goal. But do go and learn a bit about the Caisson Platoon.

Here's a good video on them

And finally, if any of you care, xbradtc.com is back up. We'll eventually get the archives back up and running as well.

Posted by Open Blogger at 03:28 PM Comments

Very Nice Gun Rights Piece


Anti-gun folks will often say things like, "Guns are only good for one thing- killing." And, you know, they are correct. I mean, they're wrong in a way, because guns are also just fun to shoot targets or clays with, but yes, their main and original intent is to kill.

So? In order for this to be bad, in and of itself, it implies that people will never have any reason to kill someone (or alter their behavior, by giving them a reasonable expectation of getting shot if they continue what they are doing). In fact, ordinary lawful people are forced to use guns for their actual intended purpose, all the time. The reason this is so, is because we occupy a world together with criminals and sociopaths, and there's no law that will prevent or fix these people. I would hazard that nearly all the people who were put in the situation of having to discharge or even brandish their weapon at a bad guy, had always hoped they would never ever have to. Fortunately, most of the time just producing a weapon ends the conflict.

As an aside, I would like to point out to you drooling Morons that a current google search on this topic, once rich with supporting data, now buries most of the 2nd Amendment defenders' posts. Almost all I got in the first couple pages is the anti-gun folks' articles trying to debunk the idea that people defend themselves with guns. Interesting, eh.

Anyway, this great column came up over at Splitters and I just had to share.

I have watched training videos on what to do in the event of an active shooter situation, and they all focus on the Run/Hide/Fight principle. Run if you can, hide if running isn’t an option, and fight if options A and B fail. What you should not do is simply lay down and die, or hope that the attacker dies of a stroke, or sit passively and get murdered. And in every one of these training videos, if you get to the Fight stage, the video producer recognizes something very basic, very simple, and yet so important – arm yourself. Grab a chair, grab a stapler, grab a binder or a coffee pot. Grab whatever you can to inflict the maximum amount of damage on your attacker, because something is better than nothing. But you know what is better than something? The right tool for the job, that’s what. You can attack an active shooter with a coffee pot, if that’s all you have, but wouldn’t you rather have a rifle at that moment, as well as the training to use it properly? Of course, because it’s the right tool for the job.

That was just one facet of the issue. He covers all the bases with relentless logic. It's worth forwarding in part or in whole to the gun-fearing people in your life who may still be able to listen to reason. Please go over to Splitters and check it out. It's long, but not LongCat long.

Posted by LauraW. at 01:48 PM Comments

Nature vs. Nurture (CBD)

—Open Blogger

I saw this article a few weeks ago, and was struck by how confidently the authors reject "nurture" as having any formative power. In Heritability and why Parents (but not Parenting) Matter, Brian Boutwell and Razib Khan argue that the passing of genes is the most important function of parents (not a new idea -- George Williams wrote about it in his first book, Adaptation And Natural Selection in the 1960s), but also that the result of those genes is pretty much baked in the cake.

You are the product of precisely two biological parents (even the so-called, "three-parent babies" are somewhat of a misnomer). Whether you know them or not, whether you like them or not, the fact that you have parents (and were, in fact, not cloned from a prior version of yourself) carries with it great consequences. Yet, family socialization effects on personality are not large, not prominent, and not pronounced (and for many traits, they are absent). What parents do to their children (in particular, their style of parenting and efforts at socialization) does not leave permanent marks and does not differentiate individuals within the population for outcomes like intelligence, antisocial behavior, and a host of other outcomes. So why then, are parents consequential (beyond the obvious role that they play in providing safety, shelter, etc.)? How do we rectify the apparent contradiction?

Continue reading

Posted by Open Blogger at 11:30 AM Comments

Open Thread


J.E.H. MacDonald, "Snowfields, Evening" (1913)

Posted by rdbrewer at 10:14 AM Comments

Morning Thread (2-12-2016)


Hello, Friday. How you doin'?

Posted by Andy at 06:19 AM Comments

Overnight Open Thread (2-11-2016)


Comment of the Day

The point people seem to not comprehend about criminal sentencing is that its supposed to suck. That's the point: we punish people by punishing them. Prison is supposed to suck. Its supposed to be miserable and awful when you break the law and are punished for it. There's no reason for it to be sadistic and deliberately horrible, but its even worse to be too easy on the prisoner.

The second purpose of punishment is to take someone away from society to protect society and demonstrate that some things will not be permitted. Sometimes that message has to be permanent.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 11, 2016 08:32 PM (39g3+)

How The Sausage Gets Made By Democratic Operatives With Bylines

So Atlantic reporter Marc Ambinder wanted early access to a Hillary Clinton foreign policy speech and Clinton advisor/consigliere Philippe Reines was willing to give him a copy - but only if Ambinder agreed to his conditions:

From: [Philippe Reines]
Sent: Wednesday, July 15 2009 10:06 AM
To: Ambinder, Marc
Subject: Re: Do you have a copy of HRC's speech to share?

3 [conditions] actually

1) You in your own voice describe them as "muscular"

2) You note that a look at the CFR seating plan shows that all the envoys - from Holbrooke to Mitchell to Ross - will be arrayed in front of her, which in your own clever way you can say certainly not a coincidence and meant to convey something

3) You don't say you were blackmailed!

Moments later, Ambinder compliantly responded:

From: Ambinder, Marc
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 10:07 AM
To: Philippe Reines
Subject: RE: Do you have a copy of HRC's speech to share?

got it

And here is what Ambinder wrote in his article "Hillary Clinton's 'Smart Power' Breaks Through" published later that day:

When you think of President Obama's foreign policy, think of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. That's the message behind a muscular speech that Clinton is set to deliver today to the Council on Foreign Relations. The staging gives a clue to its purpose: seated in front of Clinton, subordinate to Clinton, in the first row, will be three potentially rival power centers: envoys Richard Holbrooke and George Mitchell, and National Security Council senior director Dennis Ross.

Good monkey - you followed directions so you get treat!

Pope Francis at the Border: Tear Down These Walls Porous Fences

Can Anyone Ever Be Fired From The VA?

But These Are Military Jazz-Playing Robots

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), an agency within the Department of Defense (DOD), is spending $2.3 million to build and study jazz-playing robots. The multi-million-dollar defense grant awarded to the University of Arizona "will address the question of whether information systems, such as computers, are capable of collaborating with humans.

Continue reading

Posted by Maetenloch at 11:03 PM Comments

Democrat Debate: 9PM Eastern, PBS


They're now attacking Bernie Sanders on being insufficiently anti-racist.

Could be fun.

Posted by Ace at 08:32 PM Comments

Joan Walsh: Supporting Bernie Sanders is... Racist?


She wonders if working class whites are voting against Hillary because of which president she served -- Well, she served as copresident with a white man, so I'm not sure who she could mean.

More of this horrific caterwauling from the Vinegary Valkaries of Vaginal Solidarity from Ed Driscoll at the Instapundit link.

Posted by Ace at 06:10 PM Comments

Ted Nugent Doubles Down on Posting That Seems to Posit That the Anti-Gun Movement Is a Jewish Conspiracy


I tried to offer a charitable interpretation for this -- that perhaps he was trying, in a crude and insulting way, to make a somewhat-coherent point that Jews, more than anyone, should fear the disarming of a population.

However, people have pointed out that it's not just the Israeli flags; each politician in his gif has some anti-semitic descriptor attached to them. Michael Bloomberg, for example, is tagged as "9/11 Israeli Agent." Another caption identifies someone as hailing from "Jew York City."

I try to fight PC, and I try to fight false accusations of racism, homophobia, anti-semitism, and etc., but there are also accurate accusations of same, and I'm having a great deal of trouble now seeing how this could be anything but an accurate accusation.

Posted by Ace at 05:00 PM Comments

The State Department IG Subpoenaed The Clinton Foundation's Emails... Last Fall


Another avenue of investigation.

Now this is the State Department, which is engaged in a cover-up on Hillary's behalf, so I don't expect them to find anything here except what they want to find, which is "Everything looks great!"

Is the IG sufficiently independent to pursue this for real? I don't know. I have my doubts. I guess we'll see, or we won't see.

By Tom Hamburger and Rosalind S. Helderman February 11 at 12:18 PM

Investigators with the State Department issued a subpoena to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation last fall seeking documents about the charity's projects that may have required approval from the federal government during Hillary Clinton’s term as secretary of state, according to people familiar with the subpoena and written correspondence about it.

The subpoena also asked for records related to Huma Abedin, a longtime Clinton aide who for six months in 2012 was employed simultaneously by the State Department, the foundation, Clinton’s personal office, and a private consulting firm with ties to the Clintons.

The full scope and status of the inquiry, conducted by the State Department's inspector general, were not clear from the material correspondence reviewed by The Washington Post.

The rest of the article is about what this probe might be about: The Clinton Foundation says it's not about the Clinton Foundation itself, which is... what they would say. The Post goes on to note questions about Huma Abedin's activities.

Posted by Ace at 02:55 PM Comments

Meryl Streep, Asked About All-White Oscar Panel: Well We're All Really From Africa, Aren't We?


Indeed we are, the main theory goes, so it'll be interesting to the extent the same people who #LoveScience so ferociously will throw science out the window for their scalp-hunting.

I like when celebrities get into SJW trouble, not because I wish ill on them out of vengeance, but because these SJW monsters get away with a lot of destruction of Little People, under the radar -- because the media won't cover it. Instead, the media covers up.

So I hope Meryl Streep gets into SJW trouble, and begins to understand what a toxic cesspool of hatred these demented borderline-personality-disorder drama-seeking malcontents stir up, and maybe pushes back, and maybe even drops a well-deserved "GFY."

That's my hope, anyway.

What she'll probably do is issue an abject apology by 2:30 pm.

Posted by Ace at 01:14 PM Comments

Cosmpolitan Partners With Bloomberg for "Don't Date a Gunsplainer" Issue



Posted by Ace at 12:13 PM Comments

Open Thread


Martin Johnson Heade, "The Great Florida Marsh" (1886)

Posted by rdbrewer at 10:55 AM Comments

Morning Thread (2-11-2016)


PSA: Flowers and chocolates day is down to T minus 3 days. You still have time to look more thoughtful than panicked.

Posted by Andy at 07:02 AM Comments

Overnight Open Thread (2-10-2016)


252 223 >>damn kudos to Maet. So much content and the horde pegs in on one or two subjects.
He's too good for us RWC
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at February 10, 2016 12:15 AM (voOPb)

I'm just saying he puts way too much effort in a. ONT. If something catches my eye I'll read it but there is so much content. Just post an article or pic and be done with it. (And this is in no way criticizing Maet. Just think there is too much effort in the ONT.

Posted by: RWC - Team BOHICA at February 10, 2016 12:23 AM (hlMPp)














Continue reading

Posted by Maetenloch at 10:18 PM Comments

Liveblogging Fifty Shades of Gray


It just started on HBO "Zone," wtf that is.

I'll live blog it.

All right. Some character development. We saw "Christian Gray" has a sweet walk-in closet (though not as opulent as I would have figured), and there was some Huge character reveal on Anastasia. Asked if she had her GPS, she said "Sure I have my GPS, I also have a four point oh GPA."


Continue reading

Posted by Ace at 09:40 PM Comments

How to Win the White House and Save the World: Don't Talk of Reagan. Talk Like Reagan.


I've been reading some of Reagan's old speeches to confirm something to myself. At the Trump-less debate, Rand Paul finished his closing statement by saying something like, "And I'm the only Republican who'll balance the budget."

This provoked a reaction from me, because I thought -- would Reagan have just made the promise that he would balance the budget? In a closing statement, in which he could chose his own words as he liked?

Looking back at Reagan's speeches, I don't see him just promising some government action. I see him promising a government action and then immediately telling you how this will directly and tangibly benefit you.

He didn't leave you to wonder how cutting taxes might help you. He would say something elegant and magical like, "Just as free speech encourages good journalism, so do low tax rates and low regularity burdens on the farmer or businessman produce prosperity."

By the way, that's another thing Trump gets right, though he says it crudely. When did Republicans stop talking about prosperity, like it's the dirty thing the Democrats say it is? Trump gets a lot wrong -- a lot -- but he does keep telling people, "We're gonna get rich."

I hear a lot of people talking about "getting the economy back on track." What the hell does that mean? The economy is an abstraction. Money in your pocket, that's tangible. That's real. And "prosperity" is an elegant, wonderful word to describe having money and getting rich.

So I have to say, for those not understanding what other people hear in Trump's (admittedly) poorly thought out and boastful words, those are two key things people are hearing: I'm on your side, I understand your pain.

And: I'll make you rich.

Why aren't other people talking about this more?

No one should talk about reducing regulatory burdens ever again without then completing the thought and saying, "Allowing our businessmen to make things, and our farmer to grow things, without spending so much time keeping the federal government fat and happy with make-work, makes them richer, makes more products on the shelves at lower prices, and makes you richer, too."

Reagan was a teacher. He didn't just talk about policy preferences or ideology. In simple (and yet gorgeously elegant) language, he explained how each of his policies would do one of the following:

* This will make you freer.

* This will make you safer.

* This will make you richer.

* This will make you happier.

* This will make a better world for your children.

So often I hear candidates lapse into Conserva-Speak where they trouble themselves over points of policy, shorthanding years or decades of conservative ideological infighting on the issue.

But they do not end their statement with:

* This will make you freer.

* This will make you safer.

* This will make you richer.

* This will make you happier.

* This will make a better world for your children.

There is a principle called the 80/20 principle. You surely know it: 20% of the work produces 80% of the gains. But the next 80% of the work only produces the last 20% of the gains.

Trump is being taken seriously because he's not forgetting the most important thing: to tell people

* This will make you freer.

* This will make you safer.

* This will make you richer.

* This will make you happier.

* This will make a better world for your children.

That's 20% of politics. He doesn't do the 80%, the hard thinking about policy, the homework, because he's a little lazy.

Yet his 20% is producing that magical 80% of the benefits, whereas many other candidates are focusing on the 80% that only gets you the 20%.

Everyone can beat Trump.

They just have to re-read Reagan, look at those beautiful words, each so simple but so perfect, and how, after every single policy proposal, Reagan explained to you:

* This will make you freer.

* This will make you safer.

* This will make you richer.

* This will make you happier.

* This will make a better world for your children.

Trump is doing the 20% and getting the 80% because he can't really do more than that 20%. That's really all he has.

But other candidates, who know the whole 100%, are getting bogged down in the 80% that gets you the 20%.

Anyone can beat Trump.

All it takes is speaking like Reagan.

And, more importantly, thinking like Reagan. You read those speeches and you understand that Reagan had not just written pretty words; he had done his thinking with his pen, for decades, working out exactly what he believed by picking out words until he figured out the words that actually excited him.

Now he took decades to do that. But if you want a quick crib sheet: Just rip him off relentlessly.

He wouldn't mind.

PS: If a candidate doesn't know how a policy will bring about the tangible goods I'm talking about, then he should do as Reagan did -- sit down with a pen and paper until you can figure out how this policy works in people's favor.

If you can't figure that out, maybe don't mention it much as a policy, or drop it altogether.

Posted by Ace at 07:45 PM Comments

LOL: Congress Considering a Bill Which Will Make It Easier For Organizations to Divest From... Companies and Organizations Seeking to Boycott Israel


Approved, in principle, though I haven't read to see if there are any federalism problems.

Either way: LOL.

Posted by Ace at 07:09 PM Comments

The Candidate of Wall Street Billionaires Has Rigged the Game: Despite One Tie and One Blowout Loss, Clinton Has 394 Delegates to Sanders' 42


Just probably something we should occasionally note for our true-believing party-of-the-people associates.

Just say it while shaking your head sadly. Don't make any positive statements; ask about it, as a question. They'll answer the question themselves.

Just shake your head and say, "I just don't understand how Clinton could lose in two races -- okay, she supposedly 'won' in Iowa, okay -- and have 394 delegates while Sanders only has 42. Do you understand this? I'm kinda dumb but can you explain this to me? Just doesn't seem fair. Seems like income inequality all over again, writ large."

That "writ large" makes no sense at all, and neither does the income inequality thing, but you'll be talking to an Idiot and they're impressed by words they don't understand so it might be a good Politicsmanship gambit.

You don't have to use this script. Make it your own. Have fun with it.

Posted by Ace at 06:15 PM Comments

Armageddon for the Establishment?


With the race apparently now a two man affair between Cruz and Trump, the Establishment may start to wonder if maybe they did something wrong.

I liked this David Frum point:

Maybe you remember Aesop's fable of the boy and the nuts?
A boy put his hand into a jar of filberts and grasped as many as his fist could possibly hold. But when he tried to pull it out again, he found he couldn’t do so, for the neck of the jar was too small to allow of the passage of so large a handful. Unwilling to lose his nuts but unable to withdraw his hand, he burst into tears.

A bystander, who saw where the trouble lay, said to him,

"Come, my boy, don’t be so greedy. Be content with half the amount, and you'll be able to get your hand out without difficulty."

If--as the polls suggest--Donald Trump wins the Republican contests in Iowa and New Hampshire; if, 14 days from now, he's heading on to contests in Nevada and South Carolina as the overwhelming favorite; then the leaders of the Republican party will have cause to remember Aesop's fable.

Obviously that was written before Iowa, but the point still stands, with Cruz winning Iowa (Trump 2nd) and Trump winning NH (Cruz 3rd).

I do not hate everything about the Establishment. I am, psychologically, kind of inclined to be an Establishment/corporate sort of guy. I'm not proud of that, but I am.

Yet they have completely alienated me.

I will repeat I point I made 20 times in 2014 and 2015: A political coalition is in fact a coalition. That means we agree, mutually, to advance each other's interests, and not actively thwart each other's interests.

That means that the Establishment does not get to run the entire show, and get everything it wants, and block the Tea Party/grassroots from having anything they want, and attempt (successfully) to squelch and block every single Tea Party candidate.

That means that the Establishment does not get to run on Tea Party rhetoric for three months every two years and then pursue nothing but Establishment agenda items for the next twenty one months, while frequently demeaning the Tea Party as "crazy" and "wacko birds."

This is a presidential nomination, but it is also an armed negotiation. We have tried persuasion; we have tried submission. We have tried everything, in fact, short of insurrection, and I guess, all other options having failed, we're left with that one.

I would not mind being in a coalition with the Establishment again: But it must be a coalition. The GOP cannot exist for very long as a vehicle for such a small cohort of the country's population, while throwing out meaningless rhetorical chum for the Dummies they think will keep voting them power.

It is too late for any negotiations this presidential cycle -- no, we're not going to agree to Rubio based upon some very-late-in-the-game, completely-insincere-promises.

However, going forward, the Establishment may want to consider some consultation with, power sharing with, trade-of-priorities with, and basic respect for the Ugly Stupid Ill-Educated Unfashionable voters they trick into voting for them every two years.

Or else this thing just ain't gonna work, and it ain't gonna be around much longer.

Continue reading

Posted by Ace at 05:07 PM Comments

Friendly Advice for Ted Cruz


I observed, brilliantly, that Mitt Romney couldn't get away with anything in the 2012 primaries. Even though he was pretty honest for a politician -- maybe because he was pretty honest for a politician -- every time he tried to do something sneaky or said something a bit dishonest (or with hidden ulterior motives), it was obvious he was doing so.

He could not get away with it. Some candidates are Teflon, some are Velcro. Romney was Velcro.

Ted Cruz is also Velcro and he needs to know this.

Yesterday, after Cruz appeared likely to place third in New Hampshire, I wondered: "Given the media's big howdy-do over Rubio's third place finish in Iowa, will Ted Cruz make some kind of baiting reference to 'They said it couldn't be done'?"

I had two thoughts, a callow first thought and a better (I think) second thought. The callow first thought was "I hope he baits them."

The better second thought was "I sure hope he doesn't bait them, and instead appears dignified and gracious in (sort of) victory."

Well, he kinda-sorta baited them. He didn't do it much -- he just touched it lightly -- but he did start his speech with something like "Tonight we did the impossible." He quickly moved away from the direct Let's-See-How-Rubio-Likes-This parallel with Rubio's speech, but he did touch it, a little.

It felt sneaky to me, as if he'd debated "How much can I just barely touch this, so that people get it, while then moving away quickly enough that if anyone calls me on it, I can all them silly?"

I didn't think it was a good moment. I don't think one should calculate like that-- "I'll touch it just slightly, just to hit it, but so softly I can deny it later and call people silly for noticing."

I think there are two different ways to handle it. One, directly, and honestly. Just say something like:

Honestly, when my friend Marco got third place in Iowa and got so much good press out of it, I was a little annoyed. I admit that. But now that we've gotten third place, I understand. It feels good. It feels really good.

Or, make it about the media, and not Rubio:

Marco Rubio declared a victory of sorts for an unexpected third place finish in a state where he wasn't favored to win. I understand that -- he did a great job in mobilizing his troops to out-perform where everyone expected him to place. But now you (meaning Cruz's supporters) have done the same thing, and propelled this campaign to a third-place tie in a state no one expected us to be competitive in. I hope the media will give you the same kind of credit they gave Marco's team.

Like, take it head-on and explain your real thinking on the matter. Don't try to be crafty or calculating about it -- just say what you really mean.

And if you think that makes too big a deal of it: Then just omit it completely. Give a speech which is nothing like Marco's.

It's a poker idea: You don't call. You don't make weak plays. You either raise (with honesty and directness) or you fold (dropping the point completely). You don't do half-in, half-out bullshit.

I support Cruz, but Cruz rubs people the wrong way. If he wants to not just win the nomination, but also the White House, he has to figure out why he's rubbing people the wrong way, and fix that.

It's this kind of trying-to-have-it-both-ways thing which people don't trust about Cruz.

He should stop it. A true leader tries to have it both ways sometimes, but not over something small and petty like whether or not Marco Rubio got more favorable coverage for his third place win.

Be direct and honest, Mr. Cruz. Be straight-up. People see through these paper-thin poses. They're smarter than that, they really are. Even the dumb ones, they can see through ploys.

I'm not even making a moral judgment here. I'm talking about simple cost-benefit analysis.

Be the leader people actually want -- and need -- you to be, and you'll do well.

Full speech here. Yes, you're right, he barely touches this. I said that. But touch it he does. Better to seize it with both hands, or not touch it at all.

Cruz Baits Fox. I don't mind this so much, because it's not something important like an official campaign speech, which, it seems to me, ought to be about bigger things.

But yeah, Cruz is now baiting the media: where's my wall-to-wall coverage for third?

I still don't know if that's a smart play, though. The media obviously loves/loved Marco, and they're sort of in mourning.

Posted by Ace at 04:08 PM Comments

Carly Fiorina, Chris Christie Drop Out of Campaign


I liked her.

Christie is also suspending his campaign.

Christie was up-front that he was all-in in New Hampshire and that if he didn't do well there, he'd abandon the race. Well, he didn't do very well there. I think he came in sixth.

This anti-Trump Cruz ad is funny:

Continue reading

Posted by Ace at 03:16 PM Comments

Open Thread


Henry Farrer, "Evening Calm" (n.d.)

Posted by rdbrewer at 09:59 AM Comments

Morning After Open Thread


Well, I don't know about you, but I feel dirty.

Yesterday, New Hampshirens New Hampshire-ites New Hampshirii people from New Hampshire went to the polls. Three hundred and ninety six thousand of them cast their vote for Sanders, Clinton, Trump, Bush, or Kasich.

New Hampshire, you were given the privilege of being one of the first in the nation to cast your vote and you done f*cked up.

It looks like Chris Christie is going to head home to New Jersey to consider his options. Good riddance. You had your chance in 2012 and chickened out.

Jeb "Low Energy" Bush spent $1,150 per vote in New Hampshire only to come in fourth place. At that rate, it will cost him $74,500,000,000.00 to get sixty five million votes in the general election. Jeb and his superpac have spent $70,400,000.00 this cycle and they've won 3 delegates. That's $23,466,666.66 per delegate. At that rate, he would need to spend $26,845,866,666.66 to win the 1,144 delegates necessary for the nomination. Sadly, because of his ego, unlimited access to stupid people's money, and his complete disregard for the well being of the Republican party, it is likely that he will remain in the race until he's puling Jim Gilmore's numbers.

I didn't see the debate, but it appears Rubio's gaffe cost him dearly. He finished a close fifth place behind Bush and Cruz. He needs to come in first or a very, very close second in South Carolina if he wants to stay in this race. I hope Rubio directs his attacks at Bush/Trump and not Ted Cruz. If Rubio fails in South Carolina, it would be a mistake to hurt the only other acceptable not-Trump candidate.

Fiorina, Carson, and Kasich are still in the race for some reason. None of them have a path to the nomination and it'd be better for the party if the debate stage only had 3-4 real contenders on stage.

Cruz had a good showing considering he didn't spend much time or money in New Hampshire.

Continue reading

Posted by BenK at 09:06 AM Comments

The AoSHQ Amazon Store

Top Headlines
AoSHQ Podcast rss.png itunes_modern.png

Episode #134, South Carolina Debate

MP3 Download | Stream | Ask The Blog | Archives
ICYMI: The Thriving Genre of Marco Rubio Fan Fiction

Did John Dickerson Seem A Little Anti-GOP and Pro-Obama? There's a Reason for That

In the Prestige, why does Hugh Jackman run the replication-machine 100 times and kill 100 of his clones? Why doesn't he just run it once and then, now having an absolutely perfect clone, just do all the tricks with his perfect twin? Kinda stupid, dude.

The Sexual Misery of the Arab World
Interesting. I've been saying this for years. You can't turn normal sex drives into a roiling mass of frenzied taboos without expecting severe knock-on dysfunctions, especially in young men. Read any serial killer case studies, and 90% of them involve some kind of psychological abnormality that winds up attaching sexual desire to homicide.

Thoughts on Dating and the Opposite Sex, from Famous Conservatives

Speculation: Neil Gaiman Has Visited New Mexico To Help George R. R. Martin Get Unstuck In Writing His Sixths Game of Thrones Novel, Winds of Winter

WYFF: Loyal supporters of GOP granted tickets to debate in Greenville
"GOP leaders said the Peace Center isn’t large enough, so the Republican National Committee decided not to go with a lottery system." They're going with the Donald Trump Gets Booed system. [rdbrewer]

Milo Yiannopoulos: Twitter Is Gearing Up To Interfere In The Election
"If our feeds are ordered by algorithm, this effectively means that Twitter, rather than users, decides which tweets should be seen. Tweets that the algorithm decides are 'uninteresting' to users might not be seen at all." Surely you can opt out. [rdbrewer]
The Other McCain: Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton Debate: Who Hates America More? [rdbrewer]

Clickhole: The ultimate PSA
Something must be done about important things! Via @JohnEkdahl. [rdbrewer]

Quark-Gluon Plasma Recreated at CERN For First Time
"Right after the Big Bang the universe was a hot dense plasma containing the most fundamental particles, especially quarks and gluons. To recreate this state, scientists collided lead nuclei...." [rdbrewer]

Mediaite: ‘Damn It Feels Good to be a Clinton:’ New Cruz Ad Rips Hillary With Glorious Office Space Spoof [rdbrewer]

TheDC: Ingraham Shreds Gowdy For Suggesting ‘No One Is More Conservative’ Than Rubio
Ever notice guys who've spent their entire lives drawing government paychecks always favor the more establishment candidate? Especially ex-prosecutors and ex-military. [rdbrewer]

JWF: Police Baffled After Guy Named Mohammad Goes on Machete Rampage at Ohio Deli
"Weird how these things always happen after Obama lectures us about Islamophobia." [rdbrewer]

Roger L. Simon, PJM: Democratic Debate Recap: Uncle Bernie, the Mini-Schnauzer
"Bernie Sanders, unlike much of the human race, never finds himself in a position of doubting a word he is saying. He has never questioned himself, not even once, since he was twenty and probably younger. He has what my wife Sheryl calls an 'animal brain,' likening him to our dog Henry...." Via @EdDriscoll. [rdbrewer]
I'm Taking a Half Day, If That, Tomorrow. I figure I kinda worked at least a day this weekend so I'm taking tomorrow off, except for Open Threads or anything really big. If any cobloggers or weekend bloggers want to post, please do. We should have a podcast tomorrow.
NASA Bans the Word "Jesus"
Good to see they remain focused on their core mission
Tough Piece About Marco Rubio's Tentativeness, Worrisome Nature
The reporter is McKay Coppins, who, I think it's fair to say, is an aggressively anti-Republican reporter. Still, you might find it interesting.
Assuming the main thrust of the piece is true -- which I don't -- I'm not sure whether the claim that Rubio's front of confidence is a false one is a sign of weakness, or just a sign of humanity provoking feelings of empathy.
Again, assuming that's true -- which I don't -- it would tend to explain Rubio's (admirable) devotion to doing his homework, and also his (sometimes embarrassing) determination to stay on script, no matter the context.
Camille Paglia: “Sexism has nothing to do with it”: Camille Paglia on Hillary Clinton, Gloria Steinem — and why New Hampshire women broke for Bernie Sanders
"Steinem’s polished humanitarian mask had slipped, revealing the mummified fascist within. I’m sure that my delight was shared by other dissident feminists everywhere. Never before has the general public, here or abroad, more clearly seen the arrogance and amoral manipulativeness of the power elite who hijacked and stunted second-wave feminism." [rdbrewer]
Kip Thorne, Others Announce Confirmation of Gravitational Waves, First Predicted by Einstein in 1916
"Now we can listen to the universe" is the dumb child's candy they offer as a pull quote for reporters. But that aside, interesting stuff. An article here.
Time: Conservative Pundit Mary Katharine Ham on Going Back to Work After Suffering a Devastating Loss
"‘There’s a certain amount of freedom in having seen one of the worst things you’re going to see in your life, Lord willing, and coming out of the other side." [rdbrewer]

Roger L. Simon, PJM: Past Time for the GOP to Go Hard for the Black Vote
Via @EdDriscoll. [rdbrewer]

TheDC: Watergate Reporter: ‘Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy’ Didn’t Put Hillary’s Server ‘In Her Damn Closet’ [rdbrewer]

TheDC: Exclusive: Former Obama Defense Intel Chief Says Hillary Should ‘Step Down’ [rdbrewer]

Forgotten 60's Mystery Click [rdbrewer]

I guess our resident gold bug is happy
For everyone else, the shit is about to hit the fan. [rdbrewer]

I found some news here. [rdbrewer]
I (Ace) am liveblogging 50 Shades of Gray in the thread below the ONT. For as long as I can take it. If it's not bad enough to have fun with, I'll stop.
Breitbart: Fake Blood and War Chants: Milo Yiannopoulos Event at Rutgers Disrupted by Feminists, Black Lives Matter Activists
"The event drew a huge crowd, with the line of students waiting to enter the venue stretching around campus. It’s the first stage of Yiannopoulos 'Dangerous Faggot Tour,' a series of speeches by the Breitbart Tech editor on U.S campuses, which have become hotbeds of regressive-left radicalism in recent months." Here is Milo's speech. [rdbrewer]
"You think Hitler is great? Think again!"
"I have yet to speak to anyone in the Middle East who thinks badly of the genocidal Führer" ht @esotericCD [@ComradeArthur]

Malkin: Dismantling David Brooks, Obama’s Most Shameless Media Suck-Up
"Blithely ignoring the unethical, criminal, and often lethal culture of corruption that has seeped into every major federal agency over the past eight years, Brooks claims that 'the Obama administration has been remarkably scandal-free.'" He wants to show his liberal peers he's with-it. It's all about social standing, ingroup posturing and signalling--you know, that thing controlled by the basal ganglia. "Basal Dave" would be good nickname. Because seriously, is he not with-it? [rdbrewer]

Christie                       Rubio
Chris Christie to suspend presidential campaign
Too bad. I'd rather see him in the debates than Rubio who is Young and has a Family History story. You know, Rubio, Young with a Family History story. Also, he's Young. And he has a Family History story. Young. Family History. Young too. Also, Family History. [rdbrewer]

Byron York: Decisive Trump victory sends GOP establishment reeling
"According to exit polls, Trump won among men, and he won among women. He won all age groups. All income groups. Urban, suburban, rural. Every issue group. Gun owners and non-gun owners. Voters who call themselves very conservative and those who call themselves moderates. ¶ In short, Trump won everybody." (Emphasis added.) [rdbrewer]

Jonathan Turley: Clinton Supporters Create “HillaryClintonSpeeches” Site That Misdirects People Researching The Wall Street Speech Controversy [rdbrewer]

This Might Be Why Hillary Won’t Release Her Goldman Sachs Speech Transcripts ("'She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director.'")
Huffington Post Headline: ‘NH Goes Racist Sexist Xenophobic’
Lots Of Women Will Be Going To Hell Now, According To Clinton Supporter Madeleine Albright {You remember Madeleine Albright. Stood on principle and never quit the Clinton administration in protest of Bill's treatment of "bimbos." She was acting in support of women (herself).}
Intel Chief Breaks From Obama Narrative On Iran Deal
Clinton Runs To Minorities After Brutal Primary Defeat (Hillary Clinton: friend to minorities. When not busy at Wall Street fundraisers.) [rdbrewer]

NY Times: Supreme Court Deals Blow to Obama’s Efforts to Regulate Coal Emissions
"The 5-to-4 vote, with the court’s four liberal members dissenting, was unprecedented — the Supreme Court had never before granted a request to halt a regulation before review by a federal appeals court." Only 5-4? Is anyone in the liberal wing ever going to think for themselves, or are they always going to vote lockstep in a bloc? The other side is always interpreting the law differently from one another and frequently abandoning ship. That's because they're applying the law. The monolithic liberal wing is applying ideology. Anyone could do what they're doing. Just get some cardboard cutouts with three choices written on the font: A. Shit on the Constitution. B. Bigger state. C. All of the above. [rdbrewer]

There can be no legitimate disagreement with HuffPo editors
Recent Comments
willow: "ok bl, when i have something better to offer. ..."

Guy Mohawk: "My wife would divorce me if I read that mars/venus ..."

willow: "Christopher, i know. ..."

Insomniac: "165 that isn't exactly a valentine post. sorry. ..."

Trump Super Fan: "Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see this hurting Trum ..."

willow: "gak, i better wander off now. ..."

Christopher Taylor: "For some of us, Valentine's Day isn't exactly frau ..."

willow: "that isn't exactly a valentine post. sorry. ..."

willow: "I've always said, When you truly want to know the ..."

Baron Von Ottomatic: "Since most of us here are ostensibly right-leaning ..."

Insomniac: "161 I have a friend whose husband left her and the ..."

rickl: "I found a link to the Charles Murray article, iron ..."

Bloggers in Arms

Alarming News
Ambient Irony
American Digest
The Anchoress
Anticipatory Retalliation
Armies of Liberation
Attu Sees All
Bad Stated of Gruntledness
Bastard Sword
The Baron
The Bastidge
Beautiful Atrocities
A Beleaguered Conservative in Nor Cal
Belmont Club
Betsy's Page
Between the Coasts
Bill from INDC
The Bitch Girls
Blackfive, Paratrooper of Love
The Black Republican
Tim Blair
Blaster's Blog
Blithering Bunny
Blogs For Bush
Blonde Sagacity
Blue State Conservatives
The Real Boston Irish, Like A Viking
Breakdown Lane
Burn Rate
Cake or Death?
California Conservative
Cartago Delenda Est
Cavalry Charge
A Certain Slant of Light
Charmaine Yoest
Christina in London (Journal)
Chicago Boyz
The Cliffs of Insanity
Classical Values
Cold Fury
The Colossus Blog
The Corndog Blog
College Pundit
Confederate Yankee
The Country Store
Cowboy Blob
Cox & Forkum (cartoons)
Cranial Cavity
Cranky Neocon
Critical Mastiff
Croooow Blog
Cynical Nation
Da Goddess
Daily Lunch
Daily Pundit
The Daily Recycler (Vidblog)*
Daleks Weblog
Daly Thoughts
Ilyka Damen
Damn the Man
Dave Munger
Dave's Not Here
Dawn Eden
Day by Day (Cartoon)
Demure Thoughts
Steven den Beste/USS Clueless
Desert Cat's Paradise
Digger's Realm
Digital Brownshirt
Doc Peabody
Don Luskin/Conspiracy
Don Sequitors (Pop Culture)
The Dorian Davis Republican Spectacular
Drake's Drum
Dr. Sanity
The Edge of England's Sword
Emily Starr (Journal/Web-Design)
Enjoy Every Sandwich
Enter Stage Right
Eternity Road
Ether House
Dean Esmay
Fish or Man
Fatass the Conqueror
The Fat Guy
(Musings of a) Fat Kid
Feisty Republican Whore
File It Under
Fine? Why Fine?
The Flying Space Monkey
Football Fans For Truth and Beyond
The Foggiest Idea
Frinklin Speaks (Baseball)
From Left to Right
Jane Galt/AI
Garfield Ridge
Geek Empire
Geek Soapbox
George Gaskell
The Gleeful Extremist
Ghost of a Flea
GOP Vixen
The Grand Vizier
Greg Gutfeld
Grim's Hall
Hell in a Handbasket
Victor Davis Hanson
Head's Bunker (Guns)
Heard Here
Hugh Hewitt
Andrew Hofer
The Hole Card
Horrors of an Easily Distracted Mind
The House of Payne
The Hundred Percenter
I Love Jet Noise/Joatmoaf
Inoperable Terran
In the Hat
Iraq the Model
Iraq Now
Is This Blog On?
It'z News to Me
JamieR (Classics)
Joust the Facts
Just One Minute
Ken Wheaton/As I Please
Kerry Spot @ NRO
Kesher Talk
Kin's Kouch
Kikuchiryo News
Last Chance Cafe
Least Loved Bedtime Stories
Left and Right
Le Sabot Post-Moderne
Lesbien C'est Moi (reasonable liberal)
Letters From Desolation Row (JackM.) Lifelike Pundits
Lileks/The Bleat
Likeliehood of Confusion Law Blog
The Llama Butchers
Michelle Malkin
Machias Privateer
Marcland (now Hubs and Spokes)
Margi Lowry (was: Miss Apropos)
Matt Howell/Nerf-Coated World
Ryne McClaren McCullough/Stingray
Mean Mr. Mustard
Memento Moron
Memeorandum (Metablog)
Metallicity (Metal)
Miss Apropos Mind of Mog
More Eclipse Ramblings
My Pet Jawa
My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
The New Partisan
The New Vintage
Nickie Goomba
No Easy Answers
No Pundit Intended
Not a Shrinking Violet
Note-It Posts
Not So Much People
Terry Notus
Now You Know
Number 2 Pencil
NYC Smurfette (Journal)
Ocean Guy
Of the Mind
Oh, That Liberal Media
Oliver Kamm
Andrew Olmstead
On The Third Hand
One Man's Opinion
Outside the Beltway
Partisan Pundit
Patterico's Pontifications
Patriots for Bush
Peppermint Patty
The Perfect World (Discussion Forum)
The People's Cube
Petitedov (Journal)
Pink Flamingo Bar & Grill
Pirate Pundit
Polar Opposite Politics
The Politburo Diktat
The Political Teen
The Primary Main Objective
Professor Chaos
Protein Wisdom
The Pundit Guy
Q & O
The Questing Cat
Qur'an Project
Rambling's Journal
Random Birkel
Random Numbers
Rather Biased
Rational Explications
Revealed Truth
Riehl Worldview (Carnivorous Conservative)
Right on Red
The Right Place
The Rightwing Conspiracy
The Right Wing Conspirator
Rightwing Sparkle
Rip 'N Read (Podcasting)
Running At the Mouth
The Sandwich Shop
Say Anything Blog
Secure Liberty
Sekimori Liveblog
Seldom Sober
Semi-Intelligent Thoughts
Seraphic Press
Sharp as a Marble
Simon's New Blog Showcase
Simon World (Asiablog)
Roger L. Simon
Simply Kimberly
Six Meat Buffet
Slithery D
The Smoking Room
Son of Nixon
Sondra K/Knowlege is Power
South Park Pundit
Speed of Thought
The Spoons Experience
International Capitalist/Starbanker
Stop the ACLU
Strange Women Lying in Ponds
Suburban Sundries Shack
Susskins Central Dispatch
Sweet Spirits of Amonia
Sydney T's Weblog
The Tar Pit
Team Hammer
tBlog-- Are You High?
Ten Fingers Six Strings
The Therapist
Thought Mesh
Thoughts On Line
Thunder Monkey
T. Longren
TMan in Tennessee
Total Vocabulary Failure*
Traction Control/US Citizen
Jim "Mother May I Sleep With" Treacher
Truth Laid Bear
Try On the Glasses
Two Crackas in My Soup
Twisted Spinster
Two Braincells
The Unabrewer
An Unamplified Voice (Music/Opera)
The Unpopulist
The Urban Grind
VA. Conservative
Viking Pundit
Villainous Company
Vote for Judges
The Wardrobe Door
The Waterglass
Way Off Bass
Matt Welch
White Pebble (Politics/Poetry)
Whitney Gaskell (Author)
Michael Williams/Master of None
Wing Nut Echo Chamber
Witty Sex Kitten (Journal)
(John from) Wuzzadem
Meryl Yourish

Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)