The following description is quite on point. It’s by Miranda Devine:
This is quintessential Biden. Lying, gaslighting, emphatic, nasty, denying reality while in the same breath denying he’s denying reality. It is so out of the bounds of normal behaviour that people discount it or blame their own perception.
That last sentence describes the Big Lie phenomenon on the part of the Biden administration that I wrote about in this recent post.
Such composure and musicality:
Commenter “huxley” linked this website purporting to list the greatest books. It uses an algorithm based on a a group of 130 other lists, and comes up with some obvious choices as well as some curious ones.
Even some of the obvious ones are books I’ve never been keen on. For example, I just can’t get through Jane Austen at all – despite many tries because it seems it would be the sort of thing I would like. But I just don’t, and that’s that. A big yawn for me.
Then there’s the almost universally praised The Great Gatsby (#5), which I’ve actually read several times but to no avail. Another snooze, although I do think the Gatsby character is an interesting portrait in how a person can live a lie (I recently discovered a relative of mine by marriage had a Gatsby-esque invented persona, and it was quite a shock to know that). For One Hundred Years of Solitude (#4!), I read the first chapter about ten times and then gave up. The “woke” selections on the list, such as Beloved – I couldn’t get through it. On the other hand, I liked I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings which is a memoir rather than fiction (and is #33 on their nonfiction list). I read that book when it first came out and was fresh and new.
High and proud on the list are many of my favorites: Moby Dick (#6), Catch 22 (#23), all those Russian novels, Borges, Orwell, Huxley (the one with the upper case, not the lower), the Brontes, and Lewis Carroll. But squeezed way down on the list are many of my other favorites, which apparently have fallen out of favor: Cry the Beloved Country (a beautiful and heartrending book that only reached spot #280), The Bridge of San Luis Rey (a travesty to place it way way down there at number 629), the brilliant Pale Horse Pale Rider with the ignominious placement of #1595, and the enormously moving Tell Me a Riddle weighs in not all that much better at #833.
What is Lindsey Graham’s goal in proposing a national abortion bill at this point, shortly before the midterms? There’s a common belief on the right that he’s trying to sabotage Republican control of the Senate in 2022, as argued in many comments I’ve seen around the blogosphere.
It would certainly seem that way. Graham has a long history of RINOism, and this bill has no chance of passing and becoming law in the present Congress and under the Biden presidency, and it gives the left ammunition for scare talk about Republicans and their Handmaid’s Tale designs on women’s bodies.
Or is he trying to expose “moderate” Democrats as extremists, when they speak against it?
Or is he trying to introduce a federal abortion bill that’s actually moderate and that conforms to the opinions of the majority of Americans, and mimics Europe’s policies on abortion?
Critics call it an abortion ban after 15 weeks, but actually it allows exceptions for rape, incest, and to save the life of the mother. It’s also going nowhere; McConnell has said, “most of the members of my conference prefer that this be dealt with at the state level.”
As far as I’m concerned, the bill is useless and counterproductive, but I’m not 100% sure most Americans will pay attention to a failed bill. The big issues for most Americans are the economy and the economy, as well as the economy. And probably most people for whom access to unlimited abortion is the big issue were not about to vote for Republicans anyway.
The part that bothers me most about Graham’s bill is that a federal abortion bill is or should be beyond the reach of what is constitutionally acceptable. Dobbs threw the abortion question back to the individual states, which I believe is where it should be, absent a constitutional amendment on the subject. Congressional legislation goes against that idea, although Dobbs only clearly established the limit for the court system and Congress might at least theoretically be able to pass something of the sort, subject to a later SCOTUS ruling. The Democrats certainly would like to try, because they’ve often spoken of “codifying” Roe by passing a bill that would prohibit states from banning abortion or even from limiting it in some common ways.
But it seems to me that it’s hypocritical for Graham or GOP candidates to get behind this bill. Maybe Graham is trying to finesse the Democrats in some way, and prove – through the bill’s rejection by the GOP leadership – that the GOP has no intention of banning abortion on a national level, thus depriving Democrats of a potential talking point? It seems a bit late in the game for that, plus it’s too Byzantine. A better way to suggest the same message would be to not propose a national bill at all.
NOTE: Last May I discussed whether a national bill on abortion (proposed by Democrats, but the same would be true for a Republican bill) would be constitutional. One thing I mentioned is that any effort to argue that it is constitutional would almost certainly employ the overused Commerce Clause, but that the present Court would almost certainly reject that argument, as it should. I see that Glenn Reynolds wrote about that on Thursday.
“SEO” stands for “Search Engine Optimization,” which is apparently one of the main keys to Google rankings.
I’m lousy at it, and so I decided to install a plugin that supposedly assists in that endeavor. One of my main problems is that, for reasons so far unknown, Google doesn’t quite recognize me. If you search for “thenewneo blog” it does show the URL for my blog, but underneath the listing it says: “No information is available for this page.” When I click on “learn why,” it doesn’t yield any information I can use. As far as I know, I don’t have any code on my blog that blocks Google trawlers from learning about the blog, but Google acts as though I do.
And the plugin didn’t help, either, although it did provide some rather amusing writing tips. I reminds me of when I was in high school in New York, and teachers used to teach entire courses with the Regents exams in mind. In the case of Google, you’re supposed to write your posts with Google in mind, which means you focus on things like keywords and images.
Fat chance.
Here are some of the things the plugin is trying to help me with on a previous post:
–Images: No images appear on this page. Add some!
–Keyphrase in introduction: Your keyphrase or its synonyms do not appear in the first paragraph. Make sure the topic is clear immediately.
–Keyphrase in SEO title: For the best SEO results write the exact match of your keyphrase in the SEO title, and put the keyphrase at the beginning of the title.
–Keyphrase density: The focus keyphrase was found 0 times. That’s less than the recommended minimum of 2 times for a text of this length. Focus on your keyphrase!
–SEO title width: The SEO title is wider than the viewable limit. Try to make it shorter.
My favorites are these:
–Flesch reading ease: The copy scores 46.2 in the test, which is considered difficult to read. Try to make shorter sentences, using less difficult words to improve readability.
–Subheading distribution: You are not using any subheadings, although your text is rather long. Try and add some subheadings.
–Sentence length: 30% of the sentences contain more than 20 words, which is more than the recommended maximum of 25%. Try to shorten the sentences.
–Passive voice: You’re using enough active voice. That’s great!
–Consecutive sentences: There is enough variety in your sentences. That’s great!
–Paragraph length: None of the paragraphs are too long. Great job!
–Transition words: Well done!
Can a bot be considered perky and condescending? I certainly hear that tone of voice, and it doesn’t make me want to obey.
And I’d like to add a correction to its grammar. “None of the paragraphs are too long” should be “is too long.”
Obviously, I have no plans to dumb down my writing as the SEO scoring would prefer. Why images supposedly are so great I have no idea, but maybe it’s just what people like. As far as I’m concerned, unless I’m showing an image for a special reason, images are just another way to slow the site down.
By the way, if anyone has a clue why Google seems blocked from describing my site, please let me know. It’s not political; plenty of blogs on the right have Google descriptions that are just fine.
In particular I remember those metal skates:
Who knows what lurks in Biden’s order on voting?:
Despite a court-imposed September 8 deadline, the Justice Department has failed to produce its strategic plan to implement President Biden’s directive regarding voter registration and participation.
The Orwellian-titled Department of Justice increasingly believes it’s above the law, or perhaps that it is the law:
On March 7, 2021, Biden issued an executive order requiring federal agencies to submit within 200 days their plans to promote voter participation. This directive, EO 14019, was premised on the fiction that “many Americans, including people of color, confront significant obstacles to exercising that fundamental right” (to vote). The Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA), the public-interest group that filed the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking disclosure from the DOJ, says there has been no explanation from Main Justice for its resistance to release relevant documents…
In a lawsuit it filed shortly after the directive, FGA noted the observation of many congressional Republicans that EO 14019 bore a striking resemblance to “a federal election takeover plan crafted by the radical left-leaning group known as Demos.” This plan, the lawmakers said, “called for the weaponization of the DOJ” for the purpose of imposing federal standards on the states.
Will we ever get to find out?
Documentary maker Ken Burns on De Santis:
Without hesitation, he agreed with [CNN] host John Berman’s suggestion that the doc addressed “some of the same themes” seen in Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ decision to send “two planeloads of migrants to Martha’s Vineyard.”
“This is coming straight out of the authoritarian playbook,” Burns, 69, insisted of DeSantis’ relocation of around 50 border crossers to the Massachusetts hotspot…
“And so, when you look at the story that we’re telling of the US and the Holocaust, you understand that the time to save a democracy is before it’s lost. We promise you,” he warned.
Sitting alongside co-director Lynn Novick, Burns insisted that sending immigrants to one of the ritziest vacation spots in the US was actually “the abstraction of human life.”
“It’s basically saying that you can use a human life that is as valuable as yours or mine or Lynn’s and to put it in a position of becoming a political pawn in somebody’s authoritarian game,” he insisted.
“This is what’s so disturbing about DeSantis — to use human beings, to weaponize human beings for a political purpose,” he claimed.
Something the left never does. The left virtue-signals at the expense of others, but as soon as they’re asked to put their money where their mouths are, they treat those same human beings like hot potatoes.
The Holocaust analogy is beneath contempt. But I have to say I’ve never been a Ken Burns fan, so it doesn’t really surprise me.
And then there are the charges that DeSantis is a human trafficker. Who’s making them? Why, Hillary Clinton, of course:
“Some politicians would rather not only have an issue, but exacerbate it to the extent of literally human trafficking,” the former Democratic presidential nominee told host Joe Scarborough on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”.
Yes, some politicians do exacerbate it. One of those politicians is Hillary Clinton.
There will be relentless attacks on everything DeSantis says and does between now and at least 2024. He will be turned into Trump-squared if they can do it. DeSantis has a different history and presentation than Trump, so it may be a bit harder for them to succeed, but I have no doubt it will work that way for Democratic voters and at least some independents.
Meanwhile, the GOP pundits I call the OnlyTrumpers will attack DeSantis from the right. See for example the discussion that begins here on a previous thread.
Judge Cannon isn’t buying the DOJ’s argument to oppose the appointment of a special master.
See also this as well as this. From the latter:
First, Cannon directed [newly-appointed Special Master] Dearie to “review all of the materials” seized during the Mar-a-Lago raid, something the DOJ desperately wanted to avoid, especially for the documents it segregated as marked classified.
Second, Dearie must verify that the property listed in the “Detailed Property Inventory” “represents the full and accurate extent of the property seized.” Here Cannon suggests that Dearie may consider obtaining sworn affidavits from individuals involved in the raid. While not a failsafe, the sworn affidavits will lessen the chance that agents omitted (or added) items from the property inventory list.
Judge Cannon also directed the special master to review the documents for privilege, including for formal assertions of “executive privilege.” This represents another victory for Trump because the DOJ has been adamant that Trump has no right to assert “executive privilege.” But without knowing what documents the DOJ has, Trump lacks the ability to develop an argument that he retains some vestiges of executive privilege.
Knowing what documents the DOJ has, in fact, proves the biggest victory for Trump from yesterday’s order. Cannon ensured that Trump’s legal team can learn the specifics of what was seized, with, most significantly, the court ordering the DOJ to make any documents with classification markings to be made available “for inspection by Plaintiff’s counsel, with controlled access conditions (including necessary clearance requirements) and under the supervision of the Special Master.” The government must also provide copies of all other documents to Trump’s lawyers and for nondocumentary items, the DOJ must make them available to Trump’s attorneys for inspection.
More at the link. There is also a November 30 deadline for the special master, which places it after the midterm election. The DOJ plans to appeal to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, but it remains to be seen how quickly and effectively that could happen. And then there’s always SCOTUS.
Here are some quotes from the judge’s order denying the DOJ motion for a stay:
… [T]he Court declines to conduct a subset-by-subset, piecemeal analysis of the seized property, based entirely on the Government’s representations about what is contained in a select portion of the property…
…[E]venhanded procedure does not demand unquestioning trust in the determinations of the Department of Justice…
… [T]he principles of equity require the Court to consider the specific context at issue, and that consideration is inherently impacted by the position formerly held by Plaintiff. The Court thus continues to endeavor to serve the public interest, the principles of civil and criminal procedure, and the principles of equity. And the Court remains firmly of the view that appointment of a special master to conduct a review of the seized materials, accompanied by a temporary injunction to avoid unwarranted use and disclosure of potentially privileged and/or personal materials, is fully consonant with the foregoing principles and with the need to ensure at least the appearance of fairness and integrity under unprecedented circumstances.
That’s stating the obvious, and yet the DOJ pretends it’s not.
More:
The Judge also placed significance on the leaks of information about the supposed documents AFTER the seizure by the FBI – meaning if anyone has been a threat to national security relating to the documents, it’s the feds…
Nice little slap on the wrist for the DOJ, which leaks like the proverbial sieve and then pretends it’s concerned with leaks. But the only leaks it’s concerned with are leaks that might reflect poorly on the DOJ.
Dearie sits on the district court for the Eastern District of Brooklyn, where he has taken senior status – meaning his workload has been lightened significantly as he nears the end of his time on the federal bench.
He was appointed as a judge by Ronald Reagan in 1986 and was for a time the chief judge of the Brooklyn-based district court. He also served a seven-year term, concluding in 2019, on the US Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
In his role as a FISA judge, Dearie was one of the judges who approved one of the Justice Department’s request to surveil former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page as part of the federal inquiry into Russia 2016 election interference.
Remember way back when we kept asking who these FISA judges were who allowed Russiagate to go forward? Well, apparently Dearie was one of them. However, a theory that’s long been entertained is that some of these judges may be angry at having been deceived by the FBI and DOJ. Perhaps Dearie is one of those, as well.
I am surprised at how tiny some of these actresses are/were:
Europe has a great deal of fracking potential, but Europeans have for the most part rejected that possible solution to its energy problems. Here’s some of what’s been going on, and why:
Proponents of fracking hold that Europe’s shale gas potential is needed now more than ever, though Germany, France, the Netherlands, Scotland and Bulgaria have all previously banned fracking. Now, the debate is being revived by recent moves in the UK.
Britain’s new Prime Minister Liz Truss has announced that the UK is lifting a 2019 moratorium on shale gas fracking as the country looks to ramp up domestic energy resources and help households and businesses struggling to pay soaring energy bills…
Europe has more recoverable shale gas than the U.S., according to estimates. However, the only major fracking activity is in Ukraine, which managed to wean itself off of Russian gas years ago…
The big problem with fracking in Europe is that some of the conditions that fueled the U.S. shale boom don’t exist in Europe. In most countries, it’s the state, and not private landowners, that owns the mineral rights to oil and gas in the ground. Contrast that with the U.S. where landowner’s cut can be as much as an eighth of production revenue. This in effect means that fracking does not yield big financial rewards for European landowners.
To garner more public support for the technology, the British government and some companies have previously proposed direct payments to people affected by fracking. However, environmental groups have strongly opposed the move, terming such payments as bribes. The situation is not helped by the fact that the population density in Europe is more than 3x that in the United States, fueling not-in-my-backyard protests. For instance, many rural projects have in the past been rejected because they would bring trucks and equipment used for fracking onto picturesque roads dating back to Roman times. Indeed, Gazprom has previously said that the difficulty in finding unpopulated land in Europe and enough water to exploit shale wells will help Russian gas stay competitive.
So although some of the objections involve the green lobby, some of it is connected with the fact that fracking isn’t as easy to do in Europe compared to the US, and the costs are greater.
(1) Anyone can make an error, but I think the most interesting thing about this one is that she appears to be reading all these names and titles. I would think a presidential press secretary would know them all by heart, including the name of the actual governor of Texas:
(2) The Vineyard is a lovely place in the summer. In the winter, not so much. But cruel Governor DeSantis doesn’t care:
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis hit back at critics of his plan to transport illegal immigrants entering the state, saying that blue “sanctuary cities” are now being forced to observe the ramifications of a weak border.
DeSantis made the remarks Thursday after Democrats called the transportation of migrants a political stunt.
“We take what’s happening at the southern border very seriously, unlike some,” DeSantis said in a Thursday speech, “and unlike the president of the United States, who has refused to lift a finger to secure that border.”…
DeSantis followed through on his promise to drop off illegal immigrants in progressive states, sending two planes full of migrants to Martha’s Vineyard on Wednesday.
All those declarations about being “sanctuary” states or cities was just so much empty virtue signaling, with very little thought that there was any risk involved. Now governors like Abbott (not Cruz, but Abbott – see #1 above) and DeSantis are following Alinsky’s rules for radicals numbers 4, 5, and 6:
4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”
5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage.”
6. “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”
(3) Sweden moves to the right, as its prime minister resigns after a coalition of four parties on the right win a very narrow majority in parliament.
Reuters is already at work calling the winners white supremacists:
The election marks a watershed in Swedish politics with the anti-immigration Sweden Democrats, a party with roots in the white supremacist fringe, on the threshold of gaining influence over government policy…
The success of the party, which took over from Kristersson’s Moderates as the country’s second biggest, has raised fears that Sweden’s tolerant and inclusive politics are a thing of the past.
However, their mantra that Sweden’s ills – particularly gang crime – are a result of decades of overgenerous immigration policies have hit home with many voters.
Gee, I wonder why. Can it be that people who want an end to crime are all racists?
More:
Kristersson said he would build a government “for all of Sweden and all citizens”.
Doesn’t sound so white supremacist to me.
Also:
The Sweden Democrats aim to make Sweden the European Union’s toughest on immigration policy including legislation making it possible to deny people seeking asylum based on religious or LGBTQ grounds.
The party wants to slash economic benefits for immigrants and give more powers to police, including zones in troubled areas allowing searches without concrete suspicion of a crime.
I’d like to see further details on the actual proposals, instead of the Reuters summary, before I make a judgment about that.
(4) Half of San Franciscans surveyed say they have been robbed within the last five years.
(5) The Durham investigation is probably history. I gave up on it a long long time ago. My guess is that you did, too.