What could go wrong?
I wonder if the Obama administration is starting to wish that this Twitter thing had never been invented.
Heading To Spacecraft Tech Expo
I’m going downtown. Probably not much blogging the rest of the day.
Obama’s Fantasy Life
The life of Julia provides insight into it.
Three-Way Race
Romney 44%, Obama 39%, Ron Paul 13%.
That looks like a pretty big majority for smaller government. Interestingly, it’s very similar to the 1992 result with Perot, except this time, it’s the Democrat who’s hurt by the third candidate. I suspect that this is because Paul picks up a lot of the youth vote that would otherwise go to Obama, with whom they’ve become disenchanted. Maybe the Republicans should urge Paul to run.
The Campaign To End Obesity
Dr. Taubes explains why it keeps failing.
Manual Transmissions
Americans are getting more interested in them.
I’ve never owned a car with an automatic, myself.
Tea Party Versus OWS
A comparison.
[Update a few minutes later]
Related: the Left’s idea of tolerance:
So, in the 1950s, after fighting a war against racist, Nazi monsters, Americans brought fresh vigor to their examination of their own racism and began to purge themselves of racist attitudes and policies that had poisoned our history. Likewise, in the ’70s and ’80s, when birth control and other technology made it easier for women to step beyond the bounds of their traditional roles, Americans began to accept the idea of women in the workforce and in positions of power. Today, the AIDS crisis has given us new sympathy for gays, and science is in the process of giving us a better understanding of the origins of sexual preference. In consequence, we are wrestling with questions of how to broaden our definitions of love and relationship without damaging the social fabric that has brought us so far.
So it is and so, in my opinion, it should be. But it does not in any way follow that we should therefore accept the worst, lowest and most despicable and anti-social behaviors from people simply because they belong to a group that may sometimes feel restricted or excluded.
The Left tells me it’s wrong to be suspicious when a black punk wearing a hood and loose pants slouches into my neighborhood? The Left tells me to listen with respect to the destructive deceptions of con-men like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton? The Left tells me not to fight back when some shrill, man-hating feminist virago goes on the rampage? They tell me not to be judgmental when I witness a young woman getting herself drunk enough to accept being used like a piece of meat by any young man without the virility to escort her safely home? And now the Left tells me I should not look askance at some gay weasel who abuses the privilege of speaking to young people by unleashing a foul-mouthed display of hatred, prejudice and rage?
Just say no.
More Piling On Lugar
The NRA is kicking while he’s down.
Good. Make an example of him.
Law School Malpractice
More thoughts on why many lawyers don’t understand the Constitution, from Jen Rubin:
…law schools have given way to the notion that the Constitution is whatever the Supreme Court says it is. In a sense this is true insofar as the principle of judicial review has been concretized and the other branches assent to the courts’ decisions. But the idea that the Constitution has objective meaning that can be ascertained, in part by studying works like “The Federalist,” is still resisted by the vast majority of elite law school faculty. Even weirder from faculty members’ vantage point is the idea that you can thereby assess whether the Supreme Court got a case “right” or “wrong.” That sort of assessment, using the Constitution, its text and its meaning as the touchstone for judicial interpretation is not in fashion, and hasn’t been for decades now, at elite law schools. Students study precedent and view newer decisions as either departures from or natural consequences of earlier cases. But assess that a decision, and maybe a great number before that, are just plain wrong because they misunderstood an aspect of the Framers’ intent or the structure of the Constitution? Perish the thought.
This is why so many “progressive” lawyers (including Barack Obama) have made such fools of themselves in front of a Supreme Court that actually does understand, and care about it, and why so many legal analysts in the media have been so shocked that the court actually takes constitutional arguments seriously.
The Ninth Circle Of Business Hell
That’s what California is. And the socialist nannies in Sacramento seem determined to take it even lower.