Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Cruising the Web

Enter the caption contest for this photo of the day. Very funny.

Your annual reminder of how old you're getting is available now from Beloit College indicating what today's class of incoming freshmen have never experienced. My husband bemoans this observation: "Robert De Niro is thought of as Greg Focker’s long-suffering father-in-law, not as Vito Corleone or Jimmy Conway."

Conn Carroll examines how it's possible for the GOP to still take the Senate if they run the board, and if Scott Brown can keep his seat while Romney wins the presidential election. It's tough, but it can be done. It would be a lot easier if Todd akin would stop being such an arrogant and selfish fool. So the only question remaining for Democrats is whether they run ads tying Akin to the rest of the GOP, especially the Romney-Ryan ticket or whether they run ads with all the denouncements of Akin by Republicans and say he's too extreme for even his own party. Knowing the Democrats, they could do the latter within Missouri and the former in the rest of the country. Of course the media will help out doing their level best to constantly ask questions attempting to link Akin to Romney and Ryan.

Here is a list of the top four stories that the media is downplaying in order to help Obama. Why stop at just four stories?

Jim Geraghty looks at the law in Missouri for a write-in bids. The two people Akin defeated in the primary are not allowed to be write-in candidate. What if Rush Limbaugh's brother, David Limbaugh ran? I think Democrats' heads would explode at the idea of a Senator Limbaugh.

Jay Cost looks at the Democratic coalition that elected Barack Obama and how that explains his difficulties matching Mitt Romney in fundraising this year. He's losing donors on both his left and his right. According to Jane Mayer of the New Yorker, the liberal billionaires need to step up because liberal billionaires are more virtuous than conservative billionaires or something like that. Who can follow her logic?

ABC's Jake Tapper thinks that the media is failing the country and acknowledges that "the media helped tip the scales" in 2008.

Now that it is clear that the Politico story about the FBI looking into skinny dipping in the Sea of Galilee was full of errors, attention is focusing on who might have leaked the story to Politico.

Obama's EPA suffers another loss in federal court for his regulatory overreach.

If party platforms don't matter any more, why do we have them?

Mickey Kaus reads Peter Orszag's criticism of Medicare plan and concludes that all Orszag has left to bring health care costs down are "death paels all the way down."

Niall Ferguson takes on his liberal critics of his essay in Newsweek saying that it's time for Obama to go.

The DNC is refusing to compensate a Connecticut town for overtime costs when President Obama came to fundraise at Harvey Weinstein's estate. Glenn Reynolds comments: "Campaigning as he’s governed — on your dime!"

The poor haven't even begun to realize how Obamacare is going to make their healthcare more difficult.

So why is the Social Security Administration buying 174 thousand rounds of hollow point bullets to be distributed in cities across the United States?

The Obama administration is blocking any development of national lands for oil, natural gas, or coal, they are happily willing to experiment using the land for wind and solar energy.

Stephen Hayes writes how the Democrats might be paying the penalty for ignoring Wisconsin and assuming it was safely in the Democrats' camp.

James Pethokoukis looks at the "new normal" excuse that the Democrats have adopted.

6 comments:

mark said...

Why wouldn't dems link Akin to Romney and Ryan? Akin and Ryan co-sponsored legislation that would ban abortion with no exceptions, as well as ban some types of birth control. Romney has said he favors personhood legislation.
Conservatives wanted Ryan. They got him. Asking Ryan about his position on abortion, or his parsing of types of rape ("forcible" as opposed to what?) is certainly fair game.
Obviously, repubs would like to focus on the economy. So sorry.

Rick Caird said...

Boy, Mark consistently gets things wrong. The legislation co-sponsored by Akin and Ryan prohibited FEDERAL FUNDING with exceptions for rape and incest. Mark, of course, seems to think Ryan is trying, via legislation, to over ride the Supreme Court. So sorry, Mark.

Ryan has completely answered the question of forcible rape when he said "Rape is rape". There is no place else for the Mark's of the world to go.

Obviously, Mark would like to turn the national campaign into "All Akin, all the time". So sorry, Mark.

equitus said...

My theory is that mark and those like him know they are wrong with that allegation. But it's a critical part of their political playbook to make such statements, counting on less-informed voters to react negatively.

Not going to work this year, mark. The jig is up.

mark said...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/13/us/politics/paul-ryans-views-on-abortion-guns-and-same-sex-marriage-come-to-forefront.html?_r=1

mark said...

He (ryan) is a co-sponsor of a bill that would define fetuses as people entitled to full legal protection, a proposal that has become the latest focus in the battles over abortion. The bill declares, “The life of each human being begins with fertilization, cloning, or its functional equivalent, irrespective of sex, health, function or disability, defect, stage of biological development, or condition of dependency, at which time every human being shall have all the legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood.”

The concept of personhood is a fundamental tenet of the anti-abortion movement, and under this definition, abortion and some forms of birth control could be construed as murder.

equitus said...

For anyone intrepid enough to keep up with mark's posts, he's done a bit of bait and switch. Starting with "Why wouldn't dems link Akin to Romney and Ryan?", he abandons any talk of "legitimate rape" - the real problem with Akin - and instead talks about abortion instead. Is it a surprise or scandal that Ryan is pro-life? Does mark believe that being anti-abortion means being pro-rape?

By that logic, should we all assume mark is pro-infantcide because he supports a candidate who holds that view?