Shakers without the furniture.
Yes, at least the Shakers were productive.
Shakers without the furniture.
Yes, at least the Shakers were productive.
So what is the message Christians should take from this? That it’s time for them to start threatening to behead people?
The preponderance of evidence indicates that it was Gleick. That’s certainly the way I’d bet. As commenters note, is this enough to justify a lawsuit?
It’s going to cost almost twice as much as they said it would.
Yeah, I’m shocked too. And I still think the estimate is low.
[Update a while later]
Here’s a new post by Phil Klein on the revised CBO estimates. Of course, as we said a that time, CBO estimates are always garbage in garbage out, and a lot of garbage went into it while it was being debated.
[Update a couple minutes later]
More on the lies from Guy Benson, with a bonus mention of the growing deficits, which means that there will be another debt-ceiling fight in the fall, before the election, if not sooner. Hilarious, considering all of the lies and charades the White House went through last summer to avoid that.
Political misses a few in this piece. Like what if George Bush had been president when his Justice Department ran guns to Mexico that killed Mexicans and a border agent, and then stonewalled Congress on it?
“…you can keep your plan.” Wait, what?
What kind of fools really believed him when he said this? Was he so stupid as to believe it himself, or was he just lying? And which is worse?
More fodder for campaign ads in the fall.
Based on a lot of personal experience, I find the results of this study completely unshocking.
Jeez, another fake photo. I see they’re just trying to maintain the fiction that humans walked on the moon. I mean, c’mon! You can’t even see stars in that picture. You’d think they’d at least try to photoshop them in.
[Update in the afternoon]
Wow, are my commenters gullible. They really believe this. Come on, people, just look at the lighting and the shadows! Obviously fake, just like the landing itself. And that story about the astronaut punching out that truth teller.
Mark Steyn, on his upcoming excursion of danger into the wilds of the Great White North.
Despite the hopes of the foolish, the Tea Party hasn’t gone away:
“When it comes to the presidential contest, I think the tea partiers will turn up in droves,” she told The Daily Caller.
“They aren’t rallying in the street anymore — I think they’ve been there, done that, so they appear to be quieter. But tea party chapters are still alive and vigorous, and they are just chomping at the bit to pull a lever in November.”
What’s more, says Foley, is that tea partiers will ultimately rally behind whomever the GOP nominee turns out to be.
“And frankly, I think many tea partiers are eager to pull the lever in favor of the Republican presidential nominee — whoever that turns out to be — simply because, from their perspective, that person’s policies will be clearly preferable to those of President Obama,” she said.
And then there’s this:
Foley is the rarest of species: a tea party supporter in liberal academia. A law professor at Florida International University and chair in constitutional litigation for the Institute of Justice, Foley says many of her liberal colleagues didn’t receive her pro-tea party book too well. (RELATED: Full coverage of the tea party movement)
“It’s more than a little ironic that some of the most close-minded folks I have ever met make their living as professors whose entire job is to engage in scholarly inquiry and convey that spirit of open-minded inquiry to their students,” she said. “It never ceases to amaze and disappoint me.”
I’m long past either amazement or disappointment. They can do neither any more.
[Update a few minutes later]
Here’s a review of Foley’s book, which explains the Tea Party to the idiots in the media.