The world seems to disappoint Barack Obama.
My expectations were so low it was never possible for him to disappoint me.
Via Ed Driscoll, who has further commentary.
[Update a few minutes later]
@JammieWF "This world, Barack, was never meant for one as beautiful as you." https://t.co/SdIg747hNo
— Joel Engel (@joelengel) May 6, 2014
I’ve been taking an 81 mg dose for heart-attack/stroke prevention, but maybe I shouldn’t be.
And how did they come up with 81 for the dosage? Why not a round number?
It’s not really a new thing, but this is the latest indication that most universities aren’t. They clearly want a diversity in everything except opinion.
[Update a few minutes later]
“I blame Rice as much as the bullies. By withdrawing, Rice sends a message to other campuses that the tactic works.”
Sadly, yes.
Andrew McCarthy: “Don’t draft Andrew McCarthy.”
While he would be good, it would damage the credibility of the committee to bring in a counsel whose mind is clearly already made up.
…will soon be reshaped by people who don’t use email:
as Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Parker Higgins convincingly argues, it’s not the justices’ lack of personal experience with technology that’s the problem; it’s their tendency to not understand how people use it. Returning to Justice Roberts’s concerns about villains with two phones: if he is in fact unaware of how common that behavior is – he certainly didn’t watch Breaking Bad – then that suggests a major gap in his understanding of society.
This lack of basic understanding is alarming, because the supreme court is really the only branch of power poised to confront one of the great challenges of our time: catching up our laws to the pace of innovation, defending our privacy against the sprint of surveillance. The NSA is “training more cyberwarriors” as fast as it can, but our elected representatives move at a snail’s pace when it comes to the internet. The US Congress has proven itself unable to pass even the most uncontroversial proposals, let alone comprehensive NSA reforms: the legislative branch can’t even get its act together long enough to pass an update our primary email privacy law, which was written in 1986 – before the World Wide Web had been invented.
So the future of our privacy, of our technology – these problems land at the feet of a handful of tech-unsavvy judges.
Kind of scary.
Can Congress sue the president for not faithfully executing the laws?
Sure seems like it to me. It would be nice to see what the Founders intended: checks and balances between the branches, instead of between political parties.
Apropos of nothing in particular, David Rifkin is one of my attorneys in the Mann suit.
[Update a while later]
Why are the House and Senate surrendering so much power to the Executive branch?
The American people do not understand what their congressmen and women are saying. Simply put, the legislative branch is legislating the American people out of their favor with bills that both they, and the American people, cannot understand. Legislators need to understand their own bills. The American people need to understand. The American people want to understand. The president is more appealing and more trusted than the Congress because his message is simpler. The president’s message, delivered in friendly, fatherly sound bites, is comprehensible to the people. It is clear, concise and easy to understand. Congress’ message with 2,700 page bills and 1,200 page bills is simply incomprehensible, unfathomable. Consequentially, legislators are deemed untrustworthy by the American people.
The legislators in the legislative branch need to act and they need to act quickly, very, very quickly. They need to pass rules that limit their own largess in order to prevent the progressives’ “legislators are corrupt” campaign from succeeding. They need to save our country by returning the people’s house to the people. They have let it be run by lawyers. They have leveled Americans’ trust with legalese.
The legislators need to simplify, simplify, simplify. They can start by reducing the number of pages in their bills and by summarizing their objectives. Comprehensive bills are compromising our republican form of government. The American people are turning to the wrong branch of government – the executive branch, the president, the branch that is most vulnerable to tyranny and corruption. Ironically, the American people are trusting the branch that can enact the most uncensored control over the people if left unchecked.
Maybe no so much any more, though, fortunately. At least judging by recent polling.
Now that we know that saturated fat is actually the best kind for us, it would make a world of sense for them to go back to cooking them in tallow. It would be healthier, it was what made them taste great in the old days, and it would save them money given how it would just be a bi-product of the beef that they already mass produce.
Let’s start with that ten p.m. phone call between Obama and Hillary on the night of the terror attack. (I’m sorry –video demonstration.) We don’t know what they actually said. And since it was only the two of them, we probably never will. But we do know this — they hate each other. But at the same time their futures were inextricably tied in this case. Talk about drah-mah…. all that gnashing of teeth and swallowing of emotion while being forced to agree on their farshtinkener story. The dialogue writes itself.
And speaking of the former secretary of State, how’s this for a scene — Hillary at the Benghazi victims’ funeral reassuring the grieving parents they’ll get that “evil filmmaker” who’s behind their sons’ murders when all the while she knows that’s baloney? Wow. Great stuff. Straight out of a vampire movie – Dracula or even the classic Nosferatu. Angelica is just made for it. (I know wrong hair color, but that can be fixed and she’s been there before. She killed as Morticia Addams. Just think what she would do with the scenery chewing iconic “What difference does it make?” scene? Ladies and gentlemen of the Academy, need I say more?)
Dude.
So, I was reading this article about how people shouldn’t start a response to a question with the word, “so.”
I’ve noticed this trend for the past few years, and it seems to be on the increase.
I have been known to do that in blog posts, but a new blog post actually is a change of subject.
Stop doing it when publicly responding to questions. Just stop.
Another victory for low carb, high fat.
That Eisenhower anecdote is sad. Nina Teicholz’s new book
The fact is, there has never been solid evidence for the idea that these fats cause disease. We only believe this to be the case because nutrition policy has been derailed over the past half-century by a mixture of personal ambition, bad science, politics and bias.
Gee, sort of like climate “science.”
[Sunday afternoon update]
How the war against saturated fat created carb overload, obesity and heart disease:
…there was no turning back: Too much institutional energy and research money had already been spent trying to prove Dr. Keys’s hypothesis. A bias in its favor had grown so strong that the idea just started to seem like common sense. As Harvard nutrition professor Mark Hegsted said in 1977, after successfully persuading the U.S. Senate to recommend Dr. Keys’s diet for the entire nation, the question wasn’t whether Americans should change their diets, but why not? Important benefits could be expected, he argued. And the risks? “None can be identified,” he said.
In fact, even back then, other scientists were warning about the diet’s potential unintended consequences. Today, we are dealing with the reality that these have come to pass.
One consequence is that in cutting back on fats, we are now eating a lot more carbohydrates—at least 25% more since the early 1970s. Consumption of saturated fat, meanwhile, has dropped by 11%, according to the best available government data. Translation: Instead of meat, eggs and cheese, we’re eating more pasta, grains, fruit and starchy vegetables such as potatoes. Even seemingly healthy low-fat foods, such as yogurt, are stealth carb-delivery systems, since removing the fat often requires the addition of fillers to make up for lost texture—and these are usually carbohydrate-based.
The problem is that carbohydrates break down into glucose, which causes the body to release insulin—a hormone that is fantastically efficient at storing fat. Meanwhile, fructose, the main sugar in fruit, causes the liver to generate triglycerides and other lipids in the blood that are altogether bad news. Excessive carbohydrates lead not only to obesity but also, over time, to Type 2 diabetes and, very likely, heart disease.
First emphasis mine. In that, it has much in common with climate “science.”
And as I’ve often noted, my father was a fatal casualty of that war, back in the late seventies.
[Update a few minutes later]
One other point, that I’d never considered before. The American Heart Association is probably responsible for more heart disease and cardiac (and stroke) fatalities than any other organization.