May 31, 2013
— Ace As the twisters may hit the most populated area, this has the potential to be worse than the Moore strikes.
Oh, No: Now tornado sirens are going off in Moore, too.
The tornado (one of them) is expected to hit downtown OKC in the next three minutes, per Shep Smith.
Losing Destructive Power? Shep just explained something I don't understand -- something about a down-draft rearward wind, or such -- which may have knocked the storm cell down a notch in power.
UPDATE [DIT]: Casualties reported at a Holiday Inn in Earth City MO, about 10 miles NW of St. Louis. The ball game at Busch Stadium was called off tonight.
Just lots of confusion and bad storms. Watching KMOV for coverage.
MORE: No casualties at the Holiday Inn (Express)
— Ace Europe just suffered the coldest spring in 20 years, with average temperatures down a full two degrees C; France got shellacked with a 3 degrees C drop.
The last Year Without a Summer lasted 40 months. That very cold summer was caused by volcanoes churning up ash into the skies. But there isn't any noteworthy volcanism going on now.
Which means this must be caused by something else.
You guessed it, Global Warming. Global warming is causing the frigid temperatures in Europe.
Note: I got this story from a French newspaper (Le Monde). I looked for an English-media source picking up on the story. Shock -- there isn't one. The press in England and the US has decided they don't want to talk about the possible Year Without a Summer.
Thus, the crappy translation.
(Note, though: The generally poor (cold) weather of spring is discussed at different places. It's attributed to global warming.)
Corrected: I first called 1816 the start of "the Little Ice Age." That's wrong. The Little Ice Age ran from around 1350 to 1850 -- so it contained the especially-cold 1816-1819 period, but it didn't kick it off and wasn't caused by the cold snap of 1816.
That was just what we call a "complete mistake."
[Update JohnE.]: Possible explanation for the Little Ice Age below.
— Ace A legion of rogues.
— Ace Take shelter.
Awful. Good luck, Oklahoma readers. Get some books and candles and food and get into a basement. *
* I assume this is good advice. If it's not, please ignore me.
— Ace How We See Ourselves in Online Fights:
How Everyone Else Sees Us:
Picture via @jonahgoldberg. I have no idea what it's about or why it was made. But I thought I had to find some way to share it.
They're corgis, apparently.
I asked a really dumb question, but I have to know: Is it possible this is real? Like, they put little weapon-gloves on the corgis to make them hold the weapons?
Because I'd like it to be real.
— Ace At Gateway Pundit, notice the words McClatchy (generally a liberal organization) uses to describe this.
While the developing scandal over the targeting of conservatives by the tax agency has largely focused to date on its scrutiny of groups with words such as tea party or patriot in their names, these examples suggest the government was looking at a broader array of conservative groups and perhaps individuals. Their collective experiences at a minimum could spread skepticism about the fairness of a powerful agency that should be above reproach and at worst could point to a secret political vendetta within the government against conservatives.
That's not minimizing this, as we've come to expect. That's discussing it plainly.
They discuss several stories of groups which did not have "tea party" and "patriot" in their names, strongly suggesting this was a general vendetta against conservatism.
Sue Martinek of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, already knows what happened to her and others involved in the Coalition for Life of Iowa.
Martinek said the woman never offered a first name. A womans voice on a recording at her phone number doesnt give a name, and messages left by McClatchy brought no response.
Richards told Martinek by phone in early 2009 that the groups application had been approved, Martinek said. But Richards added a condition, according to Martinek. Board members first needed to sign a letter promising not to picket in front of Planned Parenthood offices, Martinek said.
Ironically, Planned Parenthood does enjoy the type of tax-exempt status that Martineks group originally sought.
Again, not minimizing this.
— JohnE. Party of science.
I thought the "E=MC^2" on the whiteboard was helpful. It let me know I was about to have my face blown off with some epic scientific science. more...
— Open Blogger Howdy, Morons and Moronettes. tmi3rd here, and I'll be filling in tonight for CDR M and Maetenloch, who had other pressing engagements. Apparently, smoking and curing hobo meat takes time and care, and that tranny hooker porn ain't gonna watch itself.
For those who miss the regulars, they should be back at their regularly scheduled time... as long as the dead hoboes didn't have hepatitis, worms, or something equally appetizing.
Update as we head to publishing time: prayers for everyone in central Oklahoma. It's just been one thing after another for these folks. The situation is still active as of 9 PM Central, so I'll offer no updates- they won't be timely.
Please, if you're in the affected area, stay tuned to your local emergency management broadcasting, and stay safe.
— Ace Discussing a new factoid that 40% of mothers were now the primary breadwinners in their families, Erick Erickson commented that the situation was bad for children.
Which isn't all that objectionable.
But then he went a little Anchorman and opined that nature intended men to dominate women in the family sphere -- and that's Science.
So I ignored this story hoping it would go away because it's just going to cause a lot of shouting and RINO vs. True Con fighting.
But Megyn Kelly has upset my plans and forced me to mention it.
I have three observations, which don't really explain anything. They're just explanations.
First: One of the biggest problems with social conservatism as far as politics -- as far as the politics of the thing, mind you, not the truth -- is that the hedonistic message is live for yourself, live for today, and social conservatives are constantly being big buzzkills by saying, "Let's remember the children, huh?"
If you look at the abortion debate, or the social conservatives' arguments that people should have little to no sex outside of marriage, what is that about? The leftist media always casts this as "trying to control people's lives," and I suppose it is, but what is it really about?
It's about children. Sex outside of marriage will lead, inevitably, to two things:
1. Pregnancies terminated by abortions.
2. Pregnancies carried through to term with a child now born into a single-parent family.
A cavalier, loose attitude about sex is just buttered pickles for everyone... except the actual victims of it, which is children either born into poor circumstances or fetuses/babies (however you term it) aborted before they can even have those poor circumstances.
Now, as a political matter, as a message for a populace which is increasingly lazy and narcissistic, which is the politically winning message? And which becomes the Square, Nagging, Buzzkill message?
I think this argument illustrates the ever-present tension that exists between personal fulfillment and what's best for children.
Second: As you can see from Megyn Kelly's hostile reaction -- why, she almost seems like a Smelly Pirate Hooker here in her anger about Erickson's "Science (TM)"-- no one really wants to hear outsiders criticizing his or her personal choices.
And there's really no way to cast Erickson's argument as anything other than a criticism of Megyn Kelly's choices -- though he tries to soften it up and fudge it up, he is, or at least was, saying that Megyn Kelly was short-changing her kid by continuing to work.
There's no way to fudge that. It's what he said. Megyn Kelly refuses to permit him to fudge it. There's no way that you can lay down the marker that "Women who work are doing a disservice to their children" and then think a working mother is going to be mollified by a "Well if that works for you..." fudge.
Third: One problem I have with this: If you're going to lay down that marker, then don't run away from it when challenged by Megyn Kelly. I mean, if you believe that, then stand up for it and declare it proudly. If it was true when Megyn Kelly wasn't around to hector you, it remains true when she is around to hector you.
I mean, if this was important enough to say, then it's important enough to say when under fire. If it's not important enough to say, maybe it wasn't important enough to say the first time.
Just a thought.
I think, as a general matter, it is very easy and emotionally rewarding to criticize other people, which is why all human beings, since the beginning of human speech, have spent such a large amount of their time doing so (and some people, like myself, have chosen criticizing others as a career!).
Eh, I don't know. I don't know what to make of it all. I'm not going to settle the argument this afternoon so I won't bother trying.
— Ace At Ricochet.
Beginning at around 27:45 and going forward to about 35:00, there are three interesting points:
1. Obama talks as if he's not president. For example, in his Major Foreign Policy Distraction, he complained that force-feeding hunger-striking jihadis at Guantanamo didn't represent us at our best. He seems to have forgotten that with a single phone call he could order the force-feeding to stop.
2. The liberals have internalized this bizarre narrative, and always omit Obama from negative stories, as if it is literally, physically impossible that Obama might be part of the problem.
3. This hasn't been talked about much -- and I keep wanting to talk about it. A few weeks ago, Obama told the Washington Post that he often daydreams that he'd like to go "Full Bullworth" on the country. Now, Bullworth was a movie about a suicidal politician who decided to just Tell The People The Truth before he died. His truth, you won't be surprised to learn, was all left-wing cant that of course are obviously true but no one ever says. (Except the left, constantly.)
Consider all that is admitted there:
1. Obama is confessing he's not telling the people "The Truth" at the moment.
2. Obama is virtually confessing that his idea of the truth -- long hidden from the people -- is a series of left-wing "Truth Bombs" that he'd like to drop on us but of course he can't.
Um, why not? Oh right, because it would hurt him politically and that's the only thing that matters.
— Ace Via @rdbrewer4, "prancercize" combines all the benefits of exercise with all the fun of prancing.
After the real video, check out the parody beneath it. more...
— Ace In the early twentieth century, there were a lot of prosecutions of Communists because they urged blowing up factories and train lines -- their literature was full of incitements to violence.
However, in a lot of cases, these incitements were largely (it was contended) rhetorical.
The Supreme Court decided that the First Amendment is too important to permit prosecutions of on-the-line speech -- speech had to be well over the line to be subject to prosecution.
Oliver Wendel Holmes established the "clear and present danger" test -- no speech could be prosecuted unless it produced a clear threat of imminent, immediate (present) lawlessness and violence.
Prosecutions could not be founded on speculative "This might lead to violence" grounds.
Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater could get one prosecuted -- because one can see how such speech would immediately provoke a panicked run for the exits.
Shouting to an angry, near-riotous crowd "Let's go kill the mayor!" could get you prosecuted, because that would be called an incitement which has a clear and present danger of actually being followed through on.
But less than that? Anything less than a direct incitement to perform a specific illegal action which has a present likelihood of being executed?
We are free in such speech. As Holmes argued almost a hundred years ago, we must be pretty free in our speech, or else we'll always be looking over our shoulders and censoring ourselves for fear of the Government Prosecutors putting us in jail for exercising our inalienable rights as Americans.
Apparently it is no longer US law in the Eastern district of Tennessee.
Why? And did we vote on this? At what point did we, as a free people which supposedly decides our own laws, decide to overturn this nearly 100 year old judicial precedent?
Did Bill Killian decide to overturn this precedent himself, or was this directive crafted by his boss, Eric Holder?
Corrected: I originally suggested this case came down in the 30s. It's older than that -- it came down in 1919.
More: A commenter notes the doctrine was expanded and intensified in Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969.
I've never heard a liberal challenging this doctrine -- until now. They really liked the doctrine when it was protecting elements of the left from prosecution. Now it's protecting some elements on the right (well, I don't know if they're on the right, but they're antagonistic to members of the left's coalition) so apparently now it's been repealed.
At least as far as people hostile to the left's coalition.
Special speakers for the event will be Bill Killian, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee, and Kenneth Moore, special agent in charge of the FBIs Knoxville Division.
Sponsor of the event is the American Muslim Advisory Council of Tennessee a 15-member board formed two years ago when the General Assembly was considering passing legislation that would restrict those who worship Sharia Law, which is followed by Muslims.
Killian and Moore will provide input on how civil rights can be violated by those who post inflammatory documents targeted at Muslims on social media.
This is an educational effort with civil rights laws as they play into freedom of religion and exercising freedom of religion, Killian told The News Monday. This is also to inform the public what federal laws are in effect and what the consequences are.
Killian said the presentation will also focus on Muslim culture and how, that although terrorist acts have been committed by some in the faith, they are no different from those in other religions.
He then cited the three non-Muslim terrorists acts they can never stop talking about.
Apparently he also babbled about how the US Government, law enforcement, and non-Muslim Americans are fostering an "us versus them" attitude.
See, we're doing that.
I might say that the "us versus them" attitude certainly seems to be fostered within the Muslim community itself, but I can't, because, as you'll see, US Attorney Bill Killian wants me to know he might put me in jail for saying that.
Killian said Internet postings that violate civil rights are subject to federal jurisdiction.
Thats what everybody needs to understand, he said.
The specific posting he mentioned was pretty egregious -- a picture of a guy holding a shotgun with the caption "How to Wink at a Muslim."
Nevertheless, what we have here is a US Attorney telling Americans that they can be arrested and imprisoned for the exercise of their First Amendment rights.
In the aftermath of the Woolrich slaughter in England, the British police immediately arrested... a man for making anti-Muslim comments on Twitter.
And I thought, "Ah well, that's Britain. They're doomed, but we already knew that."
But here we are in America, with one of the 100 or so US federal appointed Attorneys telling Americans that the federal government may lock them up for their internet postings.
— Ace The ricin turns out to be "of poor quality and is a low-level, crudely made poison," said FBI ricin reviewer Mr. Blackwell.
So it's probably not that dangerous but it's the thought that counts.
This story will get some play because the notes tainted with the ricin contained anti-gun-control messages. Obama got a similar one, but it's not confirmed yet that it contained ricin.
— Pixy Misa
- PA State Rep Caught Sock Puppet Trolling People On The Internet
- Go Away: Romney Plans To Rejoin National Dialogue
- Leviathan Fail
- So-Called 'Journalists' Huddle With Holder
- Americans Have Rebuilt Less Than Half Of Wealth Lost During The Recession
- House Questioning IRS Staffers In Ohio
- US Cyber Chief: Military Unprepared For Hacking
- Aging Chinese Face A Bleak Picture
- Illegal Immigrant, Mother Of Seven Given Food Stamps, Meds, Housing And Social Security For 20 Years
- The NAZI's Little Helper
- New Polls Show England Wants Their Guns Back
- Chicago Sun Times Lay Off All Photographers
- Maryland Boy Suspended For Pop Tart Gun Given Free Life Membership To The NRA
- It Is All Coming To Pass As Monty Foretold
- Michigan Woman Dies Fighting For The Opposition In Syria
- Holder Media Backlash Intensifies
- Man Arrested For Humping A Door
- George W. Bush Skeptical Of Current Immigration Push
- More IRS Incompetence
- Interviews At Koch Brothers Protest Go About As You'd Expect
- Seniors Warned, Think Twice Before Selling Pension
Follow me on twitter.
— andy Friday!
May 30, 2013
Due to unforeseen interruptions and a 3+ hour visit at the dentist tonight's ONT will be teh vizual.more...
— Ace I've got nothin'.
[Update JohnE.]: Me either.
UPDATE UPDATE PART TWO SO URGENT: [lauraw] : *cough*
NBC News has declined to participate in an off-the-record meeting with the Justice Department on the leak investigations.— Jesse Rodriguez (@JesseRodriguez) May 30, 2013
I'm curious if MSNBC will still attend, or NBC still pretends to be the dog that wags the tail.
In a way, I think it's better for NBC if MSNBC does attend. That would help push the idea these are two separate operations and that the bizarre clownshow that is MSNBC should not reflect on NBC.
But if NBC calls the shots for MSNBC, that suggests, as I keep saying, the two are the same organization, one pitched to liberals, the other pitched to lunatic liberals.
Chris Hayes Releases Statement Regarding NBC's Decision to Boycott:
I'm going and fuck you Dad! You can't tell me what to do I'm an adult with adult ideas and adult plans!!
FUCK YOU DAD I HATE YOU!
— Ace "The chief Lawgiver of the United States," says professional idiot/expert in being black Michael Eric Dyson.
You gotta watch it, man. (It's the Washington Free Beacon's video.)
He said this on Martin Bashir. When confronted with this frothing lunacy, Bashir responds, "Indeed."
45 queries taking 0.0197 seconds, 232 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.