Thursday, March 29, 2012

Cruising the Web

You can still vote in the sandwich match-up of the day between a Po Boy and a Gyro. Boy, that one is tough! And then you can vote for the best weather song between "Here Comes the Sun" and "White Christmas."

Los Angeles can't figure out where $7 million in gasoline and other fuels has gone. The only explanation left is that it's gone into employees' personal vehicles. Ya think?

Keep your fingers crossed for the Republicans facing recall votes
in Wisconsin. If the left can throw every weapon they have against conservatives and still come up short in Wisconsin, the conservative agenda that is already working, then it will truly be a landmark victory.

Gee, liberals sure are astounded to discover that conservatives can argue their own arguments. John Podhoretz notes the amazement liberals have experienced as they observed the arguments this week at the Supreme Court. It's as if they truly believed that conservatives are the boobs that they characterize us as.
They’re so convinced of their own correctness — and so determined to believe conservatives are either a) corrupt, b) stupid or c) deluded — that they find themselves repeatedly astonished to discover conservatives are in fact capable of a) advancing and defending their own powerful arguments, b) effectively countering weak liberal arguments and c) exposing the soft underbelly of liberal self-satisfaction as they do so.
Liberals like Jeffrey Toobin and Linda Greenhouse have been so sheltered that they didn't seem to understand the conservative arguments despite publicly available briefs and judicial opinions from lower courts. They neglected one of the most important rules in intellectual debate as well as military combat, "know your enemy."

And Dahlia Lithwick is equally confused
about the conservatives' arguments.

Why is government-subsidized GM buying a stake in Peugeot just at the time when Peugeot is bleeding money?

Instead of wearing a hoodie to the House floor, perhaps Representative Bobby Rush should be concerned by the practically daily murders of young black men in his own district.

Reporters and analysts should stop taking politicians out of context.

It's telling that the White House is defending their health care law with partisan arguments, rather than constitutional arguments.

Perhaps we're not yet France.
Instead of requiring a résumé, some firms are asking applicants for their "web presence" on Twitter or Tumblr.

Philip Klein has an interesting textual analysis
of the difference between the questions Chief Justice Roberts asked the plaintiffs' lawyers and those he asked of the government's lawyers.

Avik Roy explains how Obamacare doubled down on the problems already inherent in our health care insurance structure. It makes insurance more expensive and then looks to the individual mandate to fund those requirements.

John Hawkins looks at the left's comments in one 24-hour period to Michelle Malkin's Twitter feed. Civility indeed.

Oh, yeah. Obama was part of the Congress that Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner is blaming for our economic troubles.

Obama's budget is voted down unanimously in the House. Even the Democrats don't like it.

Justice Breyer misstates the case
that is supposed to be the legal precedent for Obamacare.

How Obamacare derailed the economic recovery.

With all the debate over whether the individual mandate is severable from the rest of the healthcare reform, why not pay attention to the fact that Congress had the option of placing a severability clause into the law and did not choose to do so? They were either hoping that the Supreme Court would hesitate to strike down part of the law if they feared the entire law would fall or they truly believed that the entire law could not stand without every single part in force. Shouldn't their judgment about their own bill be deferred to?