“The Kelly File,” hosted by Megyn Kelly, attracted 546,000 viewers ages 25 to 54 in November, more than any other cable news program in the demographic coveted by advertisers. It’s the first time Kelly has topped the nightly cable news rankings since her show began last year, and the first time any Fox host has beaten O’Reilly in two years.
O’Reilly, who has hosted “The O’Reilly Factor” since 1996, drew 521,000 viewers in the 25-to-54 age group. He had the larger overall audience, with more than 3 million people tuned in nightly, while 2.73 million watched “The Kelly File.”
Both shows prospered in a month where Fox News, owned by 21st Century Fox Inc. (FOXA), outdrew every cable channel in prime time except for ESPN. Fox attracted more than 2 million viewers a night between 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. in November, which included Congressional elections and protests in Ferguson, Missouri.
Fox News’ prime-time ratings have increased 12 percent this season in the 25-to-54 age group from last year, while total prime-time viewership has climbed 3 percent.
This was inevitable. While O’Reilly appeals to an extremely devoted and, for now, larger demographic, Kelly probably has broader longterm potential with the money demo. Of course, Roger Ailes knew this when he moved her from daytime into her current slot. Roger Ailes knows everything about cable news, remember?
Kelly is also dispelling the myth that FNC prime time viewers are all octogenarians who still tell “Ike” stories. The liberal media would have us believe that all Republicans fit that description even as they champion a grandmother for the presidency in 2016.
Megyn Kelly’s growing audience is younger and most definitely not ready for Hillary.
GOP senators were outraged at Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for invoking the “nuclear option” last year, calling his push to weaken the filibuster on presidential nominees a destructive and heavy-handed move with far-reaching consequences.
But now that Republicans are about to take control of the Senate, they seem unlikely to reverse it.
As they begin to plan their opening steps in the new majority, a growing number of Republican senators are expressing deep reservations about changing Senate rules back to the old system in which 60 votes were needed to overcome filibusters on presidential nominees. Instead, a number of senior
GOP senators like Orrin Hatch of Utah and even junior Republicans like Ted Cruz of Texas are signaling privately and publicly that they want to stay at the 50-vote threshold set by Reid’s Democratic Senate majority.
Reid’s move always did seem a bit shortsighted, as it appeared for quite some time that the Republicans had a realistic chance of taking over the Senate. He must have known that he might soon be laboring under the same rule. Perhaps he knows that he won’t be around long enough to really be bothered by it, which is one optimistic way of looking at it. Reid has barely scraped by in recent elections, aided mostly by a combination of help from Big Labor and weak Republican challengers. In 2016, there is a very real possibility that he will face hugely popular Republican Governor Brian Sandoval, and Big Labor may not be enough to save him then.
Politico Really, Really Wants You to Know that the NY Post Corrected a Story that Made Obama Look Bad
The New York Post has corrected a report that wrongly quoted President Barack Obama badmouthing NBC’s Chuck Todd.
The Post’s initial report, published Saturday, quoted Obama as calling the “Meet the Press” moderator “sad” while on a visit to a Washington, D.C., bookstore. As we pointed out yesterday, the president was actually referring to the picture of himself on the jacket of Todd’s new book, “The Stranger: Barack Obama in the White House.”
In its correction, the Post said the story “was based on a pool report from President Obama’s bookstore visit. Video of the event, released later, shows it’s more likely Obama is referring to the picture of himself on the cover of the book when he says ‘he’s just sad’ — and is not referring to author Chuck Todd.”
99.999999% of all corrections by the MSM get buried deeper than Jimmy Hoffa but this one involved making The Lightbringer look like he might be in the midst of a lover’s quarrel with one of the cheer leading squad. So it is of the utmost importance that the public know that the president was being self effacing.
For the first time ever.
NATO will establish a prototype of a new rapid response force next year as it strives to improve its ability to deter a potential Russian attack, the alliance said on Tuesday.
The “interim spearhead force” will be made up of German, Dutch and Norwegian troops and is expected to be about the size of a brigade, or about 4,000 troops.
The new force responds to a proposal approved in September at a NATO summit meeting in Wales to establish a “high readiness” unit to defend the alliance’s Central European members.
Because of formidable operational and financial challenges, a permanent quick reaction force will not be established until 2016, the NATO secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, said Tuesday during meetings here of the alliance’s foreign ministers.
Gosh, it seems like only a couple of years ago that Obama was being lauded by the media lapdogs for zinging Romney over his concerns about Russia. Oh wait, it was.
At this point, it would be a far simpler task to compile a list of things that this president has been right about (the days of the week, right from left, Biden’s an idiot, etc.) than to ponder his almost hourly mistakes. That will be left to the one historian who is actually interested in an objective assessment of Barack Obama’s tenure
on the golf course in the Oval Office.
It isn’t just how often he is wrong, it’s how remarkably wrong he is, especially when it comes to foreign policy. This is the man who has been getting security briefings every day for six years and was surprised by ISIS and Vladimir Putin. One almost gets the sense that he would be truly shocked to learn that it snows in Antarctica.
It’s OK, he really can’t do much damage as a lame duck in the next couple of years, can he?
The same people who preach tolerance, cry about a lack of bipartisanship in Congress and attribute acts of violence to “rhetoric” are gleefully promoting merchandise that proudly proclaims hatred for a rather large portion of the voting American public.
They’re hitting social media to brag about it too:
The senior Senate Republican on Tuesday raised the possibility of Congress writing comprehensive healthcare legislation if the Supreme Court next year strikes down a subsidy provision of Obamacare.
Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who will lead the chamber starting in January, told reporters: “If the court would rule the way they might, we could be in a very large comprehensive revisitation” of U.S. healthcare policy.
The nation’s highest court is expected to rule by the end of June on a conservative challenge to an important part of President Barack Obama’s 2010 Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare.
The Supreme Court last month agreed to hear arguments for and against tax-credit subsidies to help millions of Americans get health coverage under the law.
At first blush, this seems like something to be excited about. After all, it would be hard to make the law worse, right? McConnell, however, admits he is unsure what the changes would look like because the decision is months away.
GOP leadership has had years now to ponder what revisions and overhauls to this bureaucratic monstrosity should look like and there really isn’t any reason for them not to have quite a list of alternatives, regardless of what SCOTUS ends up doing.
If I remain skeptical, it is probably because they keep giving me reasons to.
See? They’re not all bad.
Not only is Houston Texans star Andre Johnson an All-Pro wide receiver, but he also makes a pretty good Santa Claus.
Johnson recently continued his awesome annual tradition of acting as “Andre Claus” in a local toy store. It’s the 33-year-old’s way of giving back and making sure kids enjoy the holidays.
This year, Johnson gave 11 kids the opportunity to get everything they wanted for Christmas. The Texans wideout gave them 80 seconds to fill their carts with as much stuff as they wanted.
The kids are all under the care of Child Protective Services. The final total for Johnson this year’s shopping spree was $16,266.
With all of the negative publicity some extraordinarily bad seeds in the NFL have gotten this year, it’s nice to remember that many of them use their fame and wealth to try to do a little good in the community.
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid is using his final weeks as majority leader to threaten one of lawmakers’ most valuable assets: Recess.
Facing down a daunting list of tasks, ranging from funding the government past Dec. 11 to approving a number of new ambassadors, and less than two weeks to do it before Congress’s target adjournment at the end of next week, the Nevada Democrat said that the lame duck Congress’s work may require senators to stay in Washington for an extra week — and may even threaten Christmas.
“We may have to be here a third week and everyone should understand that. Our most important task at hand is to pass bills to fund out government, keep it from shutting down,” Reid said on Monday afternoon shortly after the Senate began its last work period of the 113th Congress.
“We have a lot to do. And there isn’t much time to accomplish it. I urge all senators to work hard to complete our work in a timely and efficient fashion. We may have to be here the week before Christmas … and hopefully, not into the Christmas holiday,” he added.
The apocalypse is obviously nigh. I mean, have you ever heard of someone who MIGHT have to work the week BEFORE Christmas? We are, after all, only paying these poor dears $174,000 a year, what right do we have to, you know, expect things from them?
Normally I am a big fan of Congress working as little as possible but this may actually be a good sign. I thought Harry might just leave the “legislative” duties to His Executive Orderness in the Oval Office until the end of the year, which would have been even worse than Congress doing things. Now that POTUS and Senate Dems are spatting, it may serve as a refresher course in the separation of powers and the respective responsibilities that go along with that separation.
The leftist media seems to have come out of its post-election denial phase and is getting back to what it does best: work as the PR wing of the Democrats. In that capacity, Job #1 is always to convince you that Republicans are the scary creatures that live under your bed, just waiting for the opportunity to take all Americans back to the 18th century.
Which brings us to this Politico headline:
The piece pretty much reads like a NARAL press release so I’m not going to quote any of it here. Its entire purpose is to let everyone know about a whole bunch of things that might happen.
None of which will make abortion illegal.
Since they like to call themselves “pro-choice,” let’s play along with that. The changes in state law that get the pro-aborts in a tizzy always have to do with shortening the time frame in which an abortion is legal. The NARAL types won’t be satisfied until retroactive abortion is available until age five, so any restriction is unacceptable to them.
The high drama in Texas that made Wendy Davis a celebrity involved making clinics safer, which shouldn’t offend anyone after the Kermit Gosnell trial. However, the same media people who have been taking up residence in Ferguson, MO, for weeks to let us know about one grand jury decision were adamant in their refusal to cover the Gosnell trial because it was a “local story.” As a result, the general public isn’t moved by the need to keep an eye on these ghouls.
When they aren’t wailing about the time period or clinic regulations, the pro-abortion lobbyists are in classic leftist mode and demanding that taxpayers foot the bill for everything.
Even if this “wave” of time period, clinic oversight or restrictive taxpayer funding laws happens, women in America will still have the choice to have an abortion. The laws just won’t make it as easy.
Decisions about such grave matters that have lifelong consequences shouldn’t be easy.
The real scary people out there are the ones who want them to be.
A white, middle-aged gunman, in what appears to be a politically motivated anti-government attack linked to immigration, fired more than a hundred rounds at buildings in downtown Austin early Friday and tried to set fire to the Mexican consulate before he died of a gunshot wound.
The Austin police chief offered this:
“If you look at the targets, it doesn’t take a genius (to suggest) that that is the potential,” Acevedo said.
“I would venture that political rhetoric might have fed into some of this, but that is speculation on my part,” he added.
Look, even if this turns out to be the first time the MSM was correct about one of these things (I remain skeptical), the USA Today headline was irresponsible given the fact that Chief Acevedo used a host of qualifying words when offering his opinion.
It’s important after all of the nationwide Ferguson protests this week that media get the “only right-wingers are violent” false narrative back on track, however. Look for this shooter to become the only news in America for several days on the off chance the police chief’s speculation proves to be true.
National Guard troops and police aimed to head off a third night of violence on Wednesday in Ferguson, Missouri, as more than 400 people have been arrested in the St. Louis suburb and around the United States in unrest after a white policeman was cleared in the killing of an unarmed black teenager.
There have been protests in Boston, New York, Los Angeles, Dallas, Atlanta and other cities decrying Monday’s grand jury decision not to indict officer Darren Wilson in the Aug. 9 shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown in a case that has touched off a debate about race relations in the United States.
I wondered on Twitter last night whether these “spontaneous” protests were being organized by SEIU, the Teamsters or the Department of Justice (my money is on SEIU, with gentle nudging from DOJ). Whenever you see them show up with pre-printed signs, you know they’ve got handlers.
This has gotten so serious that some committed activists put down their lattes and braved the frigid 68 degree weather in San Diego. They found out quickly that blocking La Jolla women from facial appointments they booked a month ago wasn’t a wise move.
As we head into night three, LAPD is back on citywide tactical alert.
In a high-profile speech on Tuesday dissecting Democrats’ losses in this month’s midterm elections, Charles Schumer, the No. 3 Senate Democrat, listed “a cascade of issues” botched by the White House, starting with Obama’s push for healthcare reforms soon after he took office in 2009.
Later on Tuesday, the White House took the unusual step of publicly pledging to veto a deal on tax breaks that Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid was trying to hammer out with Republicans in the House of Representatives.
“There is clearly a lot of unhappiness and a lot of mistrust that exists between the president and his congressional party,” said Ross Baker, political scientist at Rutgers University.
President Obama has done next to nothing to endear himself even to his own party. This family squabble could get a lot worse before it improves, if it ever gets better at all. Chuck Schumer is no shrinking violet, and if he thought it important to distance himself from the president almost two years before he is up for reelection, it’s likely that these two aren’t going to have a beer summit any time soon.
An open, protracted feud could play into Hillary’s hands, making it easier for her to put some space between her and Obama’s policies without seeming like a spiteful ex-employee.
Even if that’s all she really is.
Mitt Romney, the Republican Party’s unsuccessful presidential nominee in 2012, leads the field for the 2016 election among Republican voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released on Wednesday.
The former Massachusetts governor would have a slight edge over potential Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton by 45 percent to 44 percent in a general election, the poll found.
Among possible Republican candidates, Romney’s 19 percent put him ahead of former Florida governor Jeb Bush with 11 percent, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and Ben Carson each with 8 percent each, and U.S. Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky with 6 percent.
I have no doubt that this is an accurate reflection of the preferences of the fourteen octogenarians who still have land lines and are so lonely they answer them. I’m in communication with politically involved Republicans every day, however, and I haven’t met one person who is salivating for a Romney reboot.
That’s probably because it’s the worst idea ever.
Her Madameship will spend plenty of time distancing herself from President Obama, as will the eventual Democratic nominee, Elizabeth Warren. That means the “Romney was right, Obama was wrong” mantra that fuels what speculation there is about him has a shelf life. By July of 2016, Obama’s support network will consist of Michelle, Sasha, Malia and six MSNBC interns. In the short attention span politics era, the one thing Romney has going for him won’t be going that strong. As we found out in 2012, he won’t be making the case for himself well.
After all, he may have been right about everything, but he was right back then too and couldn’t manage to communicate that to the voters. He hasn’t been getting any campaign practice since then so he’s still an awful candidate.
HHS is hitting the malls this weekend to make sure that Obamacare is on the minds of consumers during the busiest shopping weekend of the year.
The department on Wednesday will announce new partnerships it has made with retail stores, pharmacies and popular websites to spread the word about the current open enrollment season, which began on Nov. 15 and ends Feb. 15. On three key days after Thanksgiving — Black Friday, Small Business Saturday and Cyber Monday — as well as dates beyond, Westfield Shopping Centers, the National Community Pharmacists Association and the XO Group will provide consumers with information about how they can sign up for coverage through the exchanges.
Pretty sure that Obamacare is on the minds of the people who don’t have as much money to spend this Christmas because they’ve been paying double for health insurance this past year. Do they really want to rub it in?
These people aren’t there to help, they are there to snare. We were told for years that most Americans were in favor of the law, which was never true. Some were in favor of a story they were being told but they couldn’t have sold this law to twenty people if they’d been honest.
The administration needs to goad people into participating in the exchanges because there just hasn’t been any real incentive to do so thus far. Next year, they’ll probably outlaw Salvation Army Santas, steal their bells, and begin harassing people at grocery stores.
Wait for it…(emphasis mine)
One month after hitting its highest level in seven years, consumer confidence unexpectedly retreated in November, a sign that consumers are less optimistic about the U.S. economy as the holiday shopping season begins, the Conference Board reported Tuesday.
An overall gauge of consumer confidence fell to 88.7 in November from 94.1 in October, the New York-based research group said.
The drop erased all of October’s gain and left the index at its lowest level since June.
Do the members of the media, especially financial reporters, not realize how pathetic they appear now when using the words “unexpected” or “unexpectedly” in their knee-jerk covering for the president? Leftists can growl all they want about the wonders Obama has done for the economy but, other than the stock market, it’s been a “two steps forward, one and a half back” affair for the last six years. It’s just sad to see them pretending otherwise.
Quick aside: if a lib gets in your face about how awesome “Obama’s stock market” is just ask them if this means they’re on board with allowing citizens to make private Social Security investments in it.
Shuts ‘em up every time.
The home-schooling boom is getting a new push due to opposition to Common Core, the controversial national education standard that some parents claim is using their children’s public school lessons to push a political agenda, according to critics of the Washington-backed curriculum.
North Carolina, already a home-schooling hotbed, saw a 14 percent rise last year in the number of students being educated at home, according to a report from Heartlander Magazine. Similar increases have been seen in Virginia, California and New York, according to education activists.
“If you look at national, and even state polls, you can see that the more familiar people become with Common Core, the more they dislike it,” Bob Lubke, a senior policy analyst for the North Carolina-based Civitas Institute, told FoxNews.com. “They feel like they are losing control of what their kids are learning.”
The exact number, as calculated using Common Core standard math, is: 7 oranges divided by feelings times Oprah, carry the ferret.
Enjoy the option to home school while you can, people. You can safely bet that the Nanny State Über Alles progressives will be coming for your children soon, which is one of about a thousand reasons they need to be stopped.
The New York Times indicated today that it’s getting close to a round of forced layoffs of its journalists.
The newsroom-wide email sent Thursday morning, obtained by Mother Jones, details responses to employee questions about a scheduled buyout program from Janet Elder, a deputy executive editor at the company. The email states that, “the most frequently asked question is about scale and whether or not there will be enough buyouts to avoid layoffs. Given that the buyout window is still open, it’s hard to have an absolute answer to that question just yet. Early efforts to handicap the outcome regrettably point to having to do some layoffs.”
The real question here is this: if the New York Times can’t sustain its print ad revenue, what hope is there for smaller newspapers? Will local connections and news be enough to slow that inevitable demise?
Rather than forge a new direction with digital media, newspapers clung to an identity rooted firmly in the 1940s for far too long. By the time they did begin to embrace and develop online versions, they were already being lapped by many blogs. Many papers (including the Times) created online offerings that looked like the print version. These were generally ridiculous to look at and cumbersome to navigate, but they were determined to keep a foot cemented somewhere in the past.
In the Obama era, print journalism began digging its own grave at a faster pace by abandoning what few principles were left and becoming the PR arm of Team Lightbringer.
It is difficult to visualize the near future for newspapers. Will the people who have a fetish for feeling what they’re reading pay a premium to keep print in business? For the first time in years and in the midst of a moment of nostalgia, I purchased the Sunday Los Angeles Times last week. The entire paper was about as big as the classified section alone when I last subscribed to it about a dozen years ago. I ended up going online for more details about the two articles that interested me the most. Reading the sports section and seeing news that had been in front of me in real time the day before felt like taking a trip in a time machine.
Even though I am very much thrilled with the digital media era (I’m on my fourth Kindle), I will admit that I miss the Sunday paper reading ritual from days gone by.
At least I did until I got NFL Redzone.
The New York Observer excerpted some choice lines from Ted Cruz’s meetings with various prominent Jewish leaders in New York City this week.
He’s definitely doing prep work for 2016 and, thanks to gross mischaracterizations of him by both Republicans and Democrats, he is probably quite underestimated all around. He is also smart enough to turn this to his advantage in these early stages of the election cycle. Responding to a question inspired by one of the more popular narratives — he can’t win — that Democrats and moderate Republicans are eerily in sync on, Senator Cruz had this to say:
Mr. Boteach said, “You are arguably the strongest U.S. Senator when it comes to Israel. But if you run, can you win? You’re seen as a champion of the tea party. And the media tends to caricature.”
Mr. Cruz replied, “Historically, the media has had two caricatures of Republicans. We are either stupid or evil.”
“Sometimes both!” volunteered one of the lunchers.
Mr. Cruz laughed and continued. “Reagan was stupid, according to the media. George W. Bush, Dan Quayle, stupid. Nixon was evil, Cheney was evil. I sort of take it as a backhanded compliment that they’ve invented a new caricature for me—crazy. At the end of the day, that caricature doesn’t trouble me because it’s fundamentally false. The American people have a history of making up their own minds.”
Mr. Cruz said that as groups who might be skeptical—like the one in this room—come to know him, doubts will be dispelled and stereotypes will be shattered.
He is right about this and the will guarantee that his detractors will expend a lot of effort trying to falsely define him.
Cruz surprised some by saying:
I don’t think I’m all that conservative. And it’s interesting. Reagan never once beat his chest and said, “I’m the most conservative guy who ever lived.” Reagan said, “I’m defending common sense principles—small businesses, small towns.”
The senator is correct about this as well. The Democrats were hijacked by ’60s era radicals and have been drifting ever-leftward for at least forty years. Republican moderates, driven by a desperate need to be liked, tend to get caught up in the wake of the Democrats and drift along with them, even if slowly and behind them. So, relative to a political class that is moving away from the American people, Cruz might seem uber-conservative. Real conservatives, however, don’t have a malleable set of political principles to work with. We’re where we have always been on the political spectrum, and a lot of the American people have always been here with us.
When you look at a red/blue map after the last election, the Democrats are ideologically and geographically at the outer edges of America. They’re literally a fringe party right now.
Ted Cruz isn’t an extremist, no matter how many times Democrat hacks and the John McCain crowd say he is. He’s aligned with regular Americans who are tired of Washington raiding our wallets.
Another lost son, another call for justice
The day after Michael Brown was killed by a police officer, Syreeta Myers drove from her South City home to the northwest suburb of Ferguson. She marched on the street demanding justice for Brown’s death. She wanted to stand by his parents.
Two months later, Brown’s father was calling her. This time, it was Myers who was receiving support.
Like the Browns, she had lost a son.
VonDerrit Myers Jr. was 18, just like Michael Brown. He was a young black man killed by a white police officer.
“My issue is with crooked cops who won’t hesitate to kill a black man,” Syreeta Myers tells me on this dreary Sunday afternoon.
That kind of nuance permeates this little op-ed trial of law enforcement.
The tone in the past several months has become decidedly anti-law enforcement. From libertarians wailing about the militarization of police to minority groups basically saying all cops are cold-blooded killers just looking for opportunities to shoot young black men.
While there are certainly bad cops out there, this media savaging of the entire profession is a slippery slope that we probably shouldn’t head down. The reality is that the good far outnumber the bad, and all of them run the risk of getting killed every day at work.
In the Ferguson situation, the media almost seems desperate for violence to break out and have been doing everything they can to ratchet up the tension. It’s irresponsible and potentially dangerous.
If a riot breaks out on your street, who are you going to call? The cops or Don Lemon?
Iranian and Western diplomats said nuclear talks between Iran and six world powers will be extended until July 1, 2015.
The diplomats spoke in Vienna on the final day of the group’s self-imposed, year-long period to agree on a comprehensive deal to ensure Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful.
They said they will work toward a framework agreement by March 1, outlining progress made and identifying points still be to be resolved. A final deal would be reached by July 1.
Talks are expected to resume before the end of this year, though it was not clear when or where they would be held. This would be the second extension, after an original, six-month deadline expired in July.
Well, now we know why Chuck Hagel absolutely, positively had to conclude that his service to the country was finished this morning. The Easter Island Head in charge of State has been floundering on the diplomatic front so badly that Republicans might soon miss Hillary Clinton. Nothing says, “We want to thwart your nuclear ambitions,” like giving more time to the potentially dangerous party.
There is no real evidence that Kerry and our allies will get what we want from these negotiations, so the administration better appoint another Republican that they can fire next summer.
Remember, this is an MSNBC guy reporting this, so it’s probably accurate. He also probably didn’t notice how cringe-inducing the statement was.
Again, she is an extraordinarily awful candidate. All she has to do is speak extemporaneously and she does more damage to herself than any opponent ever could. As I wrote on Wednesday, the press has a herculean task ahead of them to make this woman likable.
Hillary Clinton now on immigration order: "This is about people's lives, people, I would venture to guess, who served us tonight."
— Alex Seitz-Wald (@aseitzwald) November 22, 2014
We noted earlier that Boehner wasted no time in raining on Obama’s parade.
Well, it worked.
President Barack Obama defended his decision to bypass Congress and overhaul U.S. immigration policy on his own on Friday, saying he was forced to act because House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner would not let legislation come to a vote.
With many Americans skeptical of his decision to bypass Congress and impose an immigration overhaul unilaterally, Obama attempted to rally support for his move in a speech at a Las Vegas high school, saying illegal immigrants need a chance to come out of the shadows.
He engaged in a cross-country debate with Boehner, the top U.S. Republican, who accused Obama in Washington of sabotaging chances for bipartisan legislation and vowed to lead a fight to block his executive actions.
As a long-time Boehner detractor, it’s been a relief to write a couple of things praising him. It would be nice to see the Republicans take the victory handed to them by the American people and be as forceful as legally possible to slow down a president who is likely to become more unhinged as his celebrity in-chief days wind down. (Think of America as the Michael Douglas character in Fatal Attraction and President Obama as Glenn Close: HE WON’T BE IGNORED.)
In the past, Boehner has talked about common ground with the president on immigration reform. This toddler fit of Obama’s seems to have genuinely irritated him. If he remains irritated, the president’s executive exercises may not yield the results he wants.
Satellite images show China is building an island on a reef in the disputed Spratly Islands large enough to accommodate what could be its first offshore airstrip in the South China Sea, a leading defence publication reported on Friday.
The construction has stoked concern that China may be converting disputed territory in the mineral-rich archipelago into military installations, adding to tensions over waters also claimed by Taiwan, Malaysia, the Philippines, Vietnam and Brunei.
IHS Jane’s, a leading defence publication, said images it had obtained showed the Chinese-built island on the Fiery Cross Reef to be at least 1.9 miles long and 660-980ft wide, which it noted is “large enough to construct a runway and apron”.
The building work flies in the face of US calls for a freeze in provocative activity in the South China Sea, one of Asia’s biggest security issues. Concern is growing about an escalation in disputes even as claimants work to establish a code of conduct to resolve them.
Such is the state of the world these days that we often forget about the potential trouble spot that our military has been worried about for quite some time. China is no doubt emboldened by the fact that the United States has a weak president and knows it has at least until January 2017 to push its luck.
At least we can be assured that we won’t run out of distractions.
What could derail the Democratic Party in 2014? A combined Jeb Bush-Rob Portman ticket.
That, at least, is the assessment of Harold Ickes, a longtime Hillary Clinton adviser and one of the organizers of Ready for Hillary, the super PAC that has been laying the groundwork for a Clinton campaign.
Ickes made his assessment before reporters during a meeting Friday of Ready for Hillary’s national finance committee at a hotel in Midtown Manhattan.
A Bush-Portman ticket could doom Democrats in Bush’s native Florida and in Portman’s Ohio, Ickes said, and Bush’s Hispanic support would make Colorado a difficult lift as well.
“Bush has what appears to be very strong credentials with Hispanics,” Ickes said of the former governor, whose wife, Columba, is Mexican-American. “I’m told he speaks Spanish at home, and I’m told that he actually thinks in Spanish.”
It is always fun to watch the lefties tell us which Republicans should run for president to make their lives easier. The swooning over Jon Huntsman in 2012 was like a bad journalistic romance novel. I kept waiting for a Time cover of a chiseled Huntsman riding shirtless on a white stallion to save the GOP.
The only thing that would make Democrats happier than another Romney run is Jeb Bush running, and that’s because Jeb is the one Republican with name recognition who would probably under perform Mitt’s 2012 showing.
Portman keeps getting mentioned simply because he’s from Ohio, which is supposed to give the Republicans a boost there. The big problem with him is that no one outside of Ohio has any idea who he is. He is so bland there’s a good chance many in Ohio aren’t aware of him either.
This is a dream ticket only if you’re a Democrat who doesn’t want to have to campaign full time for the next two years.
Like Hillary Clinton.
Medical professionals and school staff missed multiple opportunities to help Adam Lanza with his severe emotional and psychiatric disorders before he burst into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., on Dec. 14, 2012, and shot dead 20 children and six educators, a Connecticut state review panel has concluded.
The Connecticut Office of the Child Advocate released a lengthy report Friday detailing Lanza’s troubled history and recommending systemic changes in the public health system to better identify and support children with multiple mental health challenges.
But the authors cautioned against drawing a direct line from Lanza’s mental illness — or the inadequate response to his needs — to the brutality at Sandy Hook. “Authors do not conclude that [these factors] add up to an inevitable arc leading to mass murder,” they write.
The “inevitable arc” statement is nonsensical. There will never be a way to look at a set of behavioral factors and claim that they will inevitably lead to a certain outcome. It’s a dodge. Yes, this is a guessing game but it is supposed to be a well-informed guessing game. If the information isn’t treated seriously enough to at least consider a tragic outcome then everyone has failed.
This kid was telegraphing some sort of meltdown for quite a long time and it was ignored. In many (most?) recent mass murders this has been the case. Mass murderers are sociopaths, and that’s not something you just wake up with one day. Somewhere after the fiftieth or sixtieth red flag, the professionals need to take serious note and whatever action they can, rather than just leave it up to subjective parental decisions and hope for the best.
The morning after President Barack Obama announced his sweeping action to overhaul the U.S. immigration system, conservative groups and states were already pulling together legal strategies to dismantle the plan.
Opponents said there will likely be a three-pronged legal approach to stymie Obama’s moves: Congress could sue the president for constitutional overreach, states could file lawsuits arguing the action strains local finances, or individuals could try to prove they’ve been harmed by the order. Just hours after the speech, an Arizona sheriff filed suit arguing the reform is unconstitutional.
“There is going to be massive litigation all over the place because there is tremendous legal confusion about what the administration is doing and what the states’ obligations will be,” said Dan Stein from the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which calls for restrictions on immigration.
While law scholars say the president is on strong legal footing, a flurry of lawsuits will cause headaches for the Obama administration in its final two years and may stir public opinion against a policy meant to be one of his signature triumphs.
How the members of the MSM don’t sustain orthopedic injuries from the contortions they go through to cover for Obama in everything they write is beyond me. At the end of the above quote we see the standard press contention that public opinion is overwhelmingly on the side of the president when it comes to immigration, which it is not. They’ve also made a host of legal scholars who side with the president appear out of the ether to reassure us that all is legit, a story even the New York Times doesn’t completely buy.
The important thing to note here is that Election Night 2014 also gave the Republicans strength at the state level. There is very little cover beyond the usual suspects in the media for the president on this issue. Were his authority “strong” and clear, they wouldn’t be fretting about what the public thinks when the courts weigh in.
Her Inevitable Madameship wasted no time in weighing in on President Obama’s executive temper tantrum last night, but did she need to?
Ace pointed out on Twitter yesterday that she was getting a free pass from the media on the subject:
Given that this story is likely to grow more contentious next year, was this a strategic misstep by Team Hillary? She hasn’t exactly been embracing the president in the last several months, especially when it comes to foreign policy. Could it be that she is a bit more simpatico with Team Lightbringer when it comes to the domestic front?
The MSM knows that they have a lot of work to do when it comes to maintaining the Hillary Myth. As we’ve noted here several times, she is an awful candidate, almost the polar opposite of her…um…husband when it comes to charm. This is why she gets asked more questions about being a grandmother than about Iran in any carefully controlled media encounters she has right now. It is also why the press was giving her a chance to shut up without most people noticing on the president’s immigration speech.
It had seemed until now that her advisers were deliberately shielding her from what they know will be an ever-worsening toxicity surrounding President Obama’s lame duck years. While it is definitely safe for her to pander to an ethnic voting bloc-it’s all Democrats do, afterall-is it wise to hitch her wagon to an executive action horse that is running amok?
This may seem subtle, but it is something that could (and should) be exploited by both her Republican and Democrat challengers for 2016. Will her governing style be pragmatic and effective like Bill Clinton’s was, or will it be more dictatorial in the fashion of the current occupant of the Oval Office?
It would appear that she may have just tipped her hand.
“All year long I have warned the president that by … threatening action repeatedly on immigration, he was making it impossible to build the trust necessary to work together,” Boehner told reporters. “With this action, the president has chosen to deliberately sabotage any chance of … bipartisan reform that he claims to seek.”
Boehner didn’t need a to offer specific counter-proposal at this time. Legislation is, after all, more complicated than executive action. What he needed to do was point out that the president is subverting the process and getting things off to a bad start with the new Congress, which he did.
As the president goes forward with more petulant executive overreach, it will be interesting to see if Democrats are emboldened or annoyed by it.
He rushes in to assure us that his employer remains the Ebola ward of the media world: isolated for fear they might contaminate those of us who are mentally healthy.
BO started defensive and tough and turned passionate and compassionate and moving. His picture will hang in many homes some day.
— Jonathan Alter (@jonathanalter) November 21, 2014
So…which is it, Big Guy?
Utah has a unique history with firing squad executions. The state used gunmen to execute Gary Gilmore in 1977, the first inmate put to death after the Supreme Court lifted a five-year moratorium on capital punishment. For years, it’s been one of just two states to allow the method as an option for inmates. And now, state legislators are looking to make it the default practice if lethal injection drugs are unavailable.
On Wednesday, the Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Interim Committee voted 9-2 in approving legislation that would bring back firing squads in executions. The bill, which will likely head to the full legislature early next year, would mandate a court hearing prior to an execution, in which a judge would determine whether the state had sufficient drugs to carry out lethal injection. If the judge ruled that drugs were lacking, a firing squad would be mandated; according to the Salt Lake Tribune, State Rep. Paul Ray says the state currently doesn’t have them.
Who knew there was a lethal injection drug shortage? I blame Obamacare.
If there are any more glitches with lethal injection executions should that continue to be the default method. Firing squads may be messy, but their brutally quick efficiency is well documented.
Well, that’s mostly because Chuck Todd kept asking questions about it and NPR is reporting on Chuck Todd’s questions. Also, they polled some Hispanic voters (but not all voters).
Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal and Wisconsin’s Scott Walker bristled at Todd’s repeated questions on immigration. “Scott’s tried. I’ve tried,” Jindal said. “I’d like to talk about energy. I’d like to talk about education.”
Walker maintains that while immigration may be important, it was not an issue that came up in his campaign or in many other states. Walker said of immigration, “If you went out on the campaign trail with us, none of us heard this issue in our races. And I dare say it probably wasn’t one of the top issues in most United States Senate or House races out there.”
If immigration didn’t rank as a top issue in most governors’ races, it does with a group that’s growing in importance in the U.S. — Hispanics. A recent Gallup poll shows immigration ranks as the second most important issue among Hispanics after the economy.
While this isn’t as ludicrous as the repeated questions about banning contraceptives that MSM hacks asked during the 2012 GOP primaries, it’s the same principle. Republican governors have a lot to crow about but Chuckie was determined to keep them focused on The Idiot King’s priorities. These governors know that what their constituents find important is quite often very different from what the press says said constituents find important.
That’s why they won.
Sure, let’s go with that, Champ.
Shivering under up to 6 feet of snow in its hardest-hit sections, Buffalo, New York, could see another 3 feet Thursday.
If the forecast holds, that’s more than a year’s worth of snow in just three days. In a typical year, Buffalo’s snowfall totals about 7 feet, according to the National Weather Service.
The extreme conditions have led to tragedy in and around Buffalo. Eight people have died, including four who suffered cardiac issues while they shoveled snow and one who died in a car accident, Erie County officials reported. A man in his 60s had a heart attack while he tried to move a snow plow or a snow blower, Erie County deputy executive Richard Tobe said Thursday.
While Buffalo may be getting hit the hardest, this pre-Thanksgiving early winter delivery from Mother Nature continues in many parts of the country.
Israelis and Palestinians expressed fear Wednesday that their decades-old conflict was moving beyond the traditional nationalist struggle between two peoples fighting for their homelands and spiraling into a raw and far-reaching religious confrontation between Jews and Muslims.
The threat — perhaps more accurately the dread — of an incipient but deadly “religious war” was expressed by Muslim clerics, Christian leaders and Jewish Israelis one day after a pair of Palestinian assailants, wielding meat cleavers and a gun, killed five Israelis, including a prominent American Israeli rabbi, in a Jerusalem synagogue.
The level of disconnect here is stunning. One does, however, have to give those participating in the “nationalist struggle” lie some grudging credit for the complete commitment to it.
The Palestinians don’t want Jews to move, they want them dead. Always have. The rational world knows that the origins of this conflict are religious, as is the fuel for keeping the fire going. Western terrorism enablers get some cover in Israel because they can frame it as dispute over territory, offering up the ridiculous “occupation” narratives. In the parts of the Middle East where there aren’t as many Jews, Christians are being slaughtered. As there are no easy tales of border wars to make up in those cases, the media largely ignores these atrocities.
The world is an increasingly dangerous place because clueless moral equivalence mongers in the West won’t acknowledge the lone, very obvious motivation for terrorism that plagues the 21st Century. The monumental effort involved in continually ignoring the common thread must exhaust them.