Hey Girl, It’s Paul Ryan

My buddy Emily Zanotti of Naked D.C. fame has a new page. It’s called, Hey Girl, It’s Paul Ryan. Here are a couple of images along with some other ones from the site that I created to give a feel for the website and it’s stunning AWESOMENESS….


7 Of Barack Obama’s Dorkiest Moments

My latest Townhall column is called, 7 Of Barack Obama’s Dorkiest Moments. Here’s an excerpt from the column.
For reasons that are hard to fathom, we’ve recently had conservative after conservative publicly agreeing that Barack Obama is amazingly super cool. This is bizarre because they’ve been convinced of this by the same old liberal hype machine at work. Remember when fashion magazines were regularly declaring that Michelle Obama, who is the worst dressed First Lady in living memory, was some kind of fashion icon? How about when Sharon Stone was telling ...


A Cynical Process

Labor unions, like the United Nations, are all too often judged by what they are envisioned as being — not by what they actually are or what they actually do.
Many people, who do not look beyond the vision or the rhetoric to the reality, still think of labor unions as protectors of working people from their employers. And union bosses still employ that kind of rhetoric. However, someone once said, “When I speak I put on a mask, but when I act I must take it off.”
That mask has been ...


Obama Is Headed Anywhere but Forward

You have to hand it to President Obama and his cabal of re-election strategists; they are masters of illusion. Their newly released Web video and its accompanying campaign slogan, “Forward,” are science fiction-level fantastical.
We’re all familiar with Obama’s penchant for deflecting responsibility and blaming his policy failures on George W. Bush, but after more than three years in office for Obama, it has gone from childish mischief to juvenile delinquency. This is a question for Guinness: Has any other president run for re-election against the record of his retired predecessor?
Indeed, ...


November Is a Plebiscite On the American Revolution

Election Day 2012 will not be a presidential election. It will be a plebiscite.
Americans will not only be voting for a president (and a House and a third of the Senate). They will be participating in a plebiscite on the definition of America.
If Americans re-elect the Democrat, Barack Obama, they will have announced that America should be like Western European countries — governed by left-wing values. Americans will have decided that America’s value system — “Liberty,” “In God We Trust,” “E Pluribus Unum” — should be replaced.
The election in November ...


Rich Man, Poor Dog

Mitt Romney can’t get past the Seamus story. In 1983, Romney put the family dog in a carrier on the roof of his Chevy as his wife, their five sons and their luggage squeezed in to the station wagon for a vacation. The dog got diarrhea. Romney has not figured out how to put the 29-year-old story behind him. So critics continue to use the episode as the defining anecdote about the GOP hopeful.
Last month, conservatives unearthed a passage in Barack Obama’s book “Dreams from My Father.” Obama wrote that ...


Give ‘em ‘L’ Mitt!

In the 1993 movie “Dave” the faux president (played by Kevin Kline) calls in his best friend (played by Charles Grodin) and they stay up all night balancing the federal budget, not by raising taxes, but by cutting unnecessary and wasteful spending.
If only it were that easy.
Most presidents have talked about cutting spending, but few succeed because Congress holds the power of the purse and is reluctant to give it up.
There have been serious and not so serious attempts to reduce government spending, from Ronald Reagan’s Grace Commission to something ...


Give Em ‘L’, Mitt!

In the 1993 movie "Dave" the faux president (played by Kevin Kline) calls in his best friend (played by Charles Grodin) and they stay up all night balancing the federal budget, not by raising taxes, but by cutting...


Tech at Night: Damaging new claim about Google Wi-Spy, Media Marxists in full outrage mode

Tech at Night

Having abandoned the seemingly-endless series of patent lawsuits in the new America Invents Act era, Tech at Night will be quick tonight. Google allegedly knew about the Wi-Spy Street View snooping for two years before ending it. Oops. No wonder FCC claims Google obstructed government investigations into the program.

Gotta love the Media Marxists: FCC ventures into campaign finance chilling effects regulation, and they claim it doesn’t go too far enough! Further, when Net Neutrality regulations force Hulu to adopt new business models, they also flip out. Never mind it’s their fault Hulu can’t simply make deals with firms like Comcast.

And finally, the Barack Obama/George Soros-led attempts to use CISPA as a distraction from Lieberman-Collins are not entirely successful, as some like Microsoft refuse to be bullied from their pro-CISPA positions.


Another Home Run by Mark Levin

Following his 2009 blockbuster best seller, Liberty and Tyranny, Levin’s latest book, Ameritopia, is another brilliant depiction of the stark differences confronting America as it chooses between liberty and tyranny. 

Mark Levin has knocked it out of the park again. Following his 2009 blockbuster best seller, Liberty and Tyranny, Levin’s latest book, Ameritopia, [...]


Obama Campaign Takes Slogan From Old European Communists

Leave it to Team O to come up with a new campaign slogan – “Forward” – that’s had a long association with communism.
Many Communist and radical publications and entities throughout the 19th and 20th centuries had the name “Forward!” or its foreign cognates. Wikipedia has an entire section called “Forward (generic name of socialist publications).”
“The name Forward carries a special meaning in socialist political terminology. It has been frequently used as a name for socialist, communist and other left-wing newspapers and publications,” the online encyclopedia explains.
The slogan “Forward!” reflected the ...


The War on Terror Isn’t Over

What role, if any does the ghost of Osama bin Laden play in the present election cycle?    It has been said that in President Obama’s pursuit of re-election that he cannot run on his record. After all, the stimulus bill did not stimulate the economy. The country has nearly accumulated more debt under this [...]


Sixty-Million Dollar Union Assault on Wisconsin Governor Walker

All-out warfare is declared by Big Labor upon a reformer governor and Republicans in the Badger State.  Outcome of June recall elections might well foretell what happens nationally in November.  The fight in Wisconsin is about to get down 'n dirty.   Mud is about to be flung upon the wall.   Tora! Tora! Tora! No, it's no sneak [...]


Huffington Post Reporter Asks Eric Holder Why Obama Was Less Than Truthful to Rolling Stone About Marijuana Laws

It turns out Attorney General Eric Holder
attended the White House Correspondents' dinner
after all.
 Stranger still, while there Holder answered a
question from the Huffington Post about President Obama's
less-than-truthful comment on his supposed inability to stop the
Department of Justice from cracking down on medical marijuana

Maybe the Huffington Post deserved that Pulitzer! (Well, except
for the fact that Holder was their guest for the evening which is
problematic). But here's the passage from HuffPo on
the Rolling Stone interview which Mike Riggs
delightfully skewered for its general softball quality, last
. One of the few real questions that the magazine managed
to ask, however, was hey, what's the deal with this
continued drug war thing? Well:

Speaking with Rolling Stone, the president tried
to explain his original comments, claiming that the recent pressure
on dispensaries and providers was in line with his intent.

"What I specifically said was that we were not going to
prioritize prosecutions of persons who are using medical
marijuana," Obama said. "I never made a commitment that somehow we
were going to give carte blanche to large-scale producers and
operators of marijuana -- and the reason is, because it's against
federal law."

The president continued: "I can't nullify congressional law. I
can't ask the Justice Department to say, 'Ignore completely a
federal law that's on the books.' What I can say is, 'Use your
prosecutorial discretion and properly prioritize your resources to
go after things that are really doing folks damage.' As a
consequence, there haven't been prosecutions of users of marijuana
for medical purposes."

Jacob Sullum had some words for the president last week as well,
namely "Obama is full of shit. During his campaign, it is true, he
often referred to medical marijuana users.
But he also promised to leave suppliers alone."

But here's Huffpost managing to actually ask about the
president's evasions on the issue:

[A] HuffPost reporter noted to Holder that Obama's reference to
"congressional law" was misleading because the executive branch
could simply remove marijuana from its "schedule one" designation,
thereby recognizing its medical use.

"That's right," Holder said.

After Kimmel's speech, a Holder deputy told HuffPost that there
was no coordinated war on medical marijuana, but that some
individual clinics were breaking both state and federal laws.

Just Say Now's blog
 at FireDogLake adds:

It is very important that Attorney General Holder himself admits
that Obama’s “can’t nullify Congressional law” statement is
completely misleading, because the relevant section of
the Controlled Substance Act
specifically gives him, the
Attorney General, the power to implement a process to reschedule
cannabis administratively.

Even Obama’s Attorney General admits there is nothing forcing
the administration to wage a war on medical marijuana and nothing
stopping the administration from making medical marijuana legal
under federal law. This is an active choice the administration is

It certainly is. But Holder, it seems, was out that evening
just "to
have fun."
 It was nice of him to pause and admit that his
boss is indeed full of shit. Hopefully both of them enjoyed Jimmy
Kimmel's stand-up.

Mike Riggs on the Obama administration's same old, same old
plans for fighting the


Massive Right Wing Fail of the Day: The Twitter Gulag

As nearly every right wing "news" source pushes the ridiculous paranoid claim that conservatives are being targeted in a "block and report" campaign on Twitter in order to get their accounts suspended -- a claim for which they present absolutely zero evidence -- here's an article at Yahoo News on this outbreak of wingnut hysteria with a few facts that they'll no doubt ignore: Husband of CNN's Dana Loesch Not Targeted by Leftists on Twitter, Evidence Suggests.

Chris Loesch posted nearly 50 tweets in the next 45 minutes, retweeting messages from supporters and responding to others who he felt were maligning his wife. Around 9 p.m. on Sunday, Twitter suspended his account.

Several conservative sites arrived at the conclusion that Chris Loesch was the target of a coordinated campaign of liberals who reported his account as abusive. "He was apparently targeted by leftist users who utilized the 'Block & Report Spam' function to trigger the social media account's automatic spam algorithm," one Washington Times blogger wrote. Human Events, a less obliquely conservative outlet, called the campaign the work of "digital brown shirt gangs that make coordinated attacks to silence conservative voices by abusing Twitter's spam flagging feature." Supporters started a #FreeChrisLoesch hashtag. After he was briefly reinstated later that night and then summarily uninstated, the tag was appended to #FreeChrisLoeschAgain.

Hains, the user whose account of her argument with Dana Loesch sparked the mix up, connected Yahoo News with several users who say they routinely report misbehaving Twitter users as abusive. "I absolutely do advise people who are harassed by these hateful idiots to use block and report," a man named Charles Johnson responded in a tweet. There is no hard evidence, however, that such efforts alone can get a legitimate user removed if he or she is not actually being abusive.

Twitter has about 900 employees and 140 million active users, so like many companies with huge numbers of users they rely on algorithms to detect anomalous behavior. These secret algorithms are incredibly sophisticated in order to prevent people from cheating them, and they're generally very effective. A recent Berkeley study that deconstructed the algorithm found a fairly low degree of error in the site's detection system for malicious spammers.

Although calls and tweets from Yahoo News to multiple Twitter spokespeople went unanswered, the company is certainly accounting for factors other than pure numbers of people flagging accounts as spam. If that were the case, prominent voices of any political flavor would regularly vanish and reappear. (This Yahoo News reporter's experimental attempt to get himself suspended on Twitter by encouraging followers to report him as abusive was unsuccessful.)

More likely, Chris Loesch triggered a red flag at the Twitter headquarters by responding to well-wishers too zealously after rising to his wife's defense. Dana Loesch posted a screenshot of the warning page her husband received for his first suspension, which states that he was cut off for "sending multiple unsolicited mentions to other users." His rapid-fire retweeting of others in the immediate aftermath of his spat with Daniel Barber could well meet that definition.

And now, of course, the eager right wingers are desperately trying to accuse me of being the puppetmaster who makes Twitter do his bidding. Here's one of the dozens and dozens of right wing trolls currently raving at me on Twitter:

How unbelievably pathetic.


Up to 200 State & Local Candidates in Danger of Being Kicked Off SC Ballots

South Carolina has a mess on its hands and there is a distinct possibility that candidates statewide will be removed from ballots in the coming months.

It all started because of a form called the Statement of Economic Interests which was to be submitted to the S.C. Ethics Commission by March 30, 2012. According to multiple candidates, the filing deadline for this form was listed as April 15th on the Ethics Commission website so when the 30th passed, they were dumbfounded to discover that they might not be eligible to run.

Now lawsuits have been filed in response to a deadline extension that was granted by the South Carolina Ethics Commission to deal with the confusion of the allegedly misprinted deadline dates.

So far, two lawsuits have been filed – one against the S.C. Democratic Party and a second against the S.C. Republican Party – to keep the names of a handful of Republicans and Democrats running for Lexington County State House races off June’s primary ballot.

There are many in S.C. that are saying these maneuvers are about one thing: incumbent protection.

According to S.C. insiders I spoke with this week, the state runs on a “good old boys network” of sorts. This network has worked together to overturn the vetoes of both Governor Mark Sanford and Governor Nikki Haley. Essentially, all power in the state resides within the S.C. House & Senate. I’m told that this veto-proof group can’t afford to allow their overriding power to be in jeopardy, and that only three seats need to change hands for all the power in the state to be shifted away from this group of incumbents. This could explain why S.C. Democratic Chairman Dick Harpootlian has decided to join the private citizens that filed lawsuits, by filing one of his own against the Republican party.

How much incumbent protection? Well for starters, the deadline pretty much gave a pass to anyone currently holding office according to Beaufort County Republican Party Chairman Jerry Hallman:

Incumbents are required to file that statement four times a year during their terms, and the elections law for filing forms at the same time “does not apply to a public official who has a current disclosure statement on file,” according to the S.C. Ethics Commission website.

That means a ruling for the plaintiff’s would probably only affect those who do not currently hold office.

(emphasis mine)

Additionally, the entire purpose of the form is to disclose income, but only income that is derived from the government. At the state level, first time candidates more than likely do not derive income from the government and as such, this form would essentially be a non-issue for most of them.

And it’s not just Democrats that want to prevent incumbent losses to newcomers. Republicans have worked to prevent new blood from joining their ranks; even when the new blood is a Republican as well.

GOP state Sen. Phil Shoopman announced this week that he won’t seek reelection in the Upstate district. Because no Democrats filed for the race before the deadline passed, Republican challenger and political newcomer Amanda Somers found herself running unopposed — set to become the only woman in the state Senate.

That was until SCGOP Chair Chad Connelly decided to reopen filing for Shoopman’s seat, allowing state Rep. Tom Corbin to enter the race as well. Although state law does allow a party to reopen filing for a race if only one person is running, Somers said Connelly’s move was designed to block her from a seat in the Senate.

And Sommers is far from the only example. Another notable race that could be thrown on its head is the seat of State Senator Jake Knotts, the disgraced Republican who referred to Gov. Nikki Haley as a “rag head” in 2010. His seat appeared to be in trouble until this series of events put challenger Katrina Shealy on the ropes.

To top it all off, judges in S.C. are not elected by the citizenry, they are appointed by this same veto-proof group that controls politics in the state. This inclusion of judges in the power structure has caused further disruption in a process that many had hoped would be expedited in light of the looming June primaries.

Grand Strand Daily and SC Hotline have joined forces to confirm that Chief Justice Jean Toal and Associate Justice Donald Beatty have recused themselves from the candidate filing case for the upcoming June 12th Republican and Democratic primaries.

In all, as many as 200 statewide and local candidates could be removed from the ballot because of this filing mishap. Placing blame is easy: the candidates that filed their paperwork incorrectly. As one insider said to me, “if you want to disrupt the ‘good old boy network’ you have to play by their rules.” In fact, I can think of no better example of why it is important to hire a lawyer when attempting to navigate campaign finance laws.

But there’s also no doubt that if the court finds in favor of the plaintiffs, the incumbency in S.C. will stand to benefit the most and the idea that the court must find in favor for the plaintiff is not cut & dried. If following the letter of the law is called for in this situation, then the Ethics Commission was within its rights to extend the deadline 10 days, allowing candidates who filed within the extension period to be on their ballot.

Opening arguments in this case will be heard tomorrow morning at the S.C. Supreme Court.