Thursday's HOT MIC
I usually agree with the venerable Vodkapundit, but I beg to differ on the issue of weed improving the Strip's already-fabulous culinary scene. (I go there to eat, not gamble. I can't stand to lose.) From personal observation, it seems to me maryjane makes you LESS discriminating, not more, when it comes to food -- unless you prefer cheetos to Kobe beef sushi or the like.
On a somewhat more significant note, the News du Jour is that Trump once again has put his Twitter foot in his mouth -- this time attacking the stunningly uninteresting Scarborough and Mika. I wrote long ago that Donald has a "signal to noise" problem and for some reason he just can't get rid of it. Who in the world pays attention to those two? Well, Hannity for one, who went on and on last night showing the truly insane comments of Scar. No doubt Trump, the video addict, was watching and getting more and more riled. Doesn't he realize you sleep better if you turn that crap off and read a book -- even a self-help book?
At the moment, I'm reading Robert Massie's "Peter the Great" in preparation for my trip to the city named after him (with a temporary interruption for Lenin). It's terrific. I recommend it to Donald. I've never learned more about, you guessed it, Russia.
A federal judge is blocking a California law set to go into effect Saturday that would have barred gun owners from possessing high-capacity ammunition magazines.
San Diego-based U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez said in a ruling Thursday that the law banning possession of magazines containing more than 10 bullets would have made criminals of thousands of otherwise law-abiding citizens who now own the magazines.
He issued a preliminary injunction backing the legal challenge by the National Rifle Association-affiliated California Rifle & Pistol Association.
“On July 1, 2017, any previously law-abiding person in California who still possesses a firearm magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds will begin their new life of crime,” writes Benitez in the injunction. He claims the injunction will maintain the status quo.
I've lived in California for over 20 years and, honestly, the gun laws here weren't that bad for most of the time. Yes, the stupid waiting period has been law, but it wasn't insane. I'm from Arizona, so every other state's gun laws seem strict to me anyway.
Since the Democrats got their super-majority here they've been waging war on the Second Amendment. Governor Moonbeam actually vetoed a few ridiculous gun bills when he began his second stint as the state's chief executive, but he's just old and tired and signing everything now.
Most of what they're trying to get away with probably won't stand up to much legal scrutiny, which is why I am forever grateful for the NRA's long, well-funded legal reach.
Lovebirds Mika and Joe are postponing their vacation to continue feud with Trump.
The hosts of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” delayed their vacation plans so they can return to the air Friday morning and fire back at President Trump’s Twitter attack.
“Joe and Mika were supposed to start their July 4th weekend early by taking Friday off — but following Trump’s tweet, they postponed their trip by day so they can be back on air Friday morning to sling some ‘bad blood’ back at Trump,” an MSNBC source told The Post.
Sure, President Trump keeps playing a part in this too, but I've just never been a fan of Mika or Joe. Useful idiot media Republicans like Scarborough do more damage to conservative causes than liberals do.
Also, as I mentioned in the FB Live video I posted earlier here today, these three all used to be one big, happy family. They probably gave Trump more free air time in the early days of the campaign than Hannity did. I don't even remember why they broke up.
It's not just those two who irritate me though. Willie Geist may be more obnoxious than they are. The fact that so many people want to start a day watching them makes me ponder moving to Costa Rica just for the coffee.
The battle cry 'We're going to live forever" used to translate more as a feeling of euphoria and elation.
But scientists are now claiming that there is more to that saying than just good feelings. In fact, a recent paper postulating that the average human could only hope to live 115 years is being challenged by scientists who say that it's premature to say there is any limit at all on a human lifespan.
Last October, scientists made a splash when they determined that on average, people can only live for about 115 years. That was the magic age at which the human body and brain just petered out; it wasn’t designed to chug along much longer than that, they said.
That conclusion, published in the journal Nature, sparked hot debate among longevity researchers. Some felt the results vindicated what they felt to be the case, while others took issue with pinpointing a limit—and such a specific one, at that.
Now, in the new issue of Nature, the editors invited scientists who criticized the original authors’ methods to lay out their arguments for why there isn't necessarily a limit to human aging. In the five resulting critiques, researchers tease apart the original authors’ methods, noting that they made assumptions that weren't warranted and overreached in their conclusions. (The researchers who concluded that human lifespan maxes out at 115 years stand by their findings, and they responded to each of the current authors’ criticisms.)
The new papers don’t argue that human lifespan is limitless. But they note that it’s premature to accept that a maximum lifespan for humans exists. It’s equally possible, they say, that humans will continue to live longer, and therefore might survive beyond 115 years. “It was reasonable that when everybody lived to 50 that the very long lived, for whatever reason—genetics or luck—would make it to 80," says Siegfried Hekimi, professor of genetics at McGill University in Canada and one of the authors of a criticism. "If people live on average to 80 or 90, like they do now, then the very long lived make it to 110 or 120. So if the average lifespan keeps expanding, that would mean the long-lived would live even longer, beyond 115 years."
Are we talking about slowing the aging process so that you can be doing at 70 what you were doing at 30? Or are we simply talking about extending old age? I can see getting excited about the former but you can take or leave the latter. Either way, living longer means more time with our loved ones, more time to teach the young, more time to enjoy the simple pleasures that make life worth living.
That's one way to look at it. Of course, others might get hysterical and talk about the "drain on resources" or how crowded the earth will get, or maybe that health care should be rationed so that only younger people -- say, those in their 80s -- get cured.
Which way do you look at the concept of limitless lifespans?
My First Facebook Live for PJ Media! Trump Trolls Mika on Twitter!
I even shaved for this, mostly because I realized that I looked like a mug shot.
Restless Times for the Grey Lady
The New York Times spent most of the early days of the Trump administration insisting that it is not, as the president often insists, failing. The venerable organization followed all of that insistence up by announcing that they're about to nuke up to one hundred copy editors and just make the remaining editors work more.
That should go swimmingly.
Today, the "we're SO not failing" paper is being hit with a walkout/protest over the staff reduction.
The Times may not be completely failing, but this isn't really what success looks like.
Do you still have a phonograph? I do. Along with about 150 vinyl records from the 1970s.
Guess I better dust it off because Sony is going retro and will be distributing vinyl again.
It has been dismissed as the niche domain of hipsters who don’t even have turntables and nostalgic dads buying countless reissues of Dark Side Of the Moon. But the resurrection of vinyl has been given major label backing, with the announcement by Sony Music that it will restart the manufacture of its own records.
The Japanese arm of Sony Music announced it would open its own record-pressing plant in March next year to cope with the huge demand for vinyl in the country.
Sony Music Japan shut down its in-house vinyl pressing production in 1989 after the advent of CDs, which entered the market in 1982 and were dominantfor the next two decades.
However, in a trend mirrored worldwide, vinyl sales in Japan have rocketed over the past four years and the country’s sole vinyl-pressing factory is unable to cope with demand, prompting Sony to step in.
It is a similar story in Europe, where most vinyl for major and independent labels is pressed by just two plants, GZ media based in the Czech Republic, and Record Industry in the Netherlands. However, their combined capacity of more than 100,000 records per day is not enough to keep up with global appetite.
“It’s actually too good,” said Record Industry’s owner, Ton Vermeulen, last year. “Demand is sky-high and we’re having to turn people away, which I don’t like doing.”
The boom in vinyl sales is attributed to two factors: older generations who have long been attached to the format, and also a younger audience used to digital forms of music who want to own a physical format; with CDs in decline, vinyl has become a popular alternative.
I stream all the music I listen to so I have no interest in investing in another system. But I thought the major reason CDs took over the market from both vinyl and tape was their far superior sound quality.
I'm sure the technology has advanced, but it's hard to imagine a diamond-tipped stylus being able to deliver the same quality of sound over my headphones as I get streaming. Or perhaps they don't even make those anymore.
Regardless, the care one must take with vinyl to avoid scratches and nicks makes it a dubious choice. I can't recall the number of records I loaned to friends that came back sounding like someone had done a tap dance on them.
What's old is new...
It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad Mad World.
San Francisco taxpayers could soon pay $190,000 in a lawsuit settlement with an undocumented immigrant who claimed he was reported to federal immigration authorities in violation of the city’s sanctuary city ordinance, the City Attorney’s office confirms to KPIX5.
The settlement is expected to be confirmed by San Francisco supervisors in future hearings.
Pedro Figueroa-Zarceno walked into the police station on December 2, 2015 to recover his stolen car.
When he left the station, he was immediately taken into custody by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
A document from federal immigration authorities released by his attorneys indicates that a San Francisco police officer directly contacted ICE and told them where to find Figueroa-Zarceno, the man’s attorneys and representatives said Wednesday.
The apparent incident, which led to the two-month detention of Figueroa-Zarceno, could be a violation of Sanctuary City policies placing limits on local law enforcement’s ability to cooperate with immigration officials, according to his attorneys.
So the city is punished when a policeman tries to enforce the law. What's next? The city being punished for a fireman putting out a fire?
We do, indeed, live in a topsy-turvy, upside down, white is black, black is white country.
Sorry, Roger -- I should have been more clear.
I was talking sales, not necessarily quality.
Because I have to admit I'm a little curious just how much damage I could do -- to my wallet and my waistline -- at Jaleo after imbibing something more than a martini or two.