Special Steyn Song of the Week: What Are You Doing New Year's Eve? [Bumped and enhanced]

[Originally posted 12/27/10]

I was going to wait until New Year's Eve to write about this, my new favorite song. But Mark Steyn has just surprised us with his own solo cover of this Loesser classic. So now's the time.

I was only dimly aware of this song until I heard about it on Steyn's Frank Loesser tribute. In it he plays a piece of the song sung by Dick Haymes, with Les Paul accompanying on guitar. Haymes' voice has an appealing vulnerability that suits the song well. But I keep wondering: why didn't Sinatra record it? Or if he did, how can I get my hands on it?

Just a couple of weeks ago my husband and I heard this song live; Suzy Bogguss, who appeared at the Birchmere, has made it a part of her Christmas show and recorded it on her new CD. She made my night when she sang it, beautifully. You can listen to a bit of it, or purchase it, here.

Back to Mark Steyn. The arrangement by Kevin Amos is perfect, romantic and jazzy and with a sprinkling of Auld Lang Syne. And the song fits Mark's voice like a glove. Very nicely done. This is my new Steyn favorite. Here's wishing Mark excellent health and a multitude of other blessings in 2011.

Now go listen to this extra-special song of the week, here. You don't have to be a Steynette to enjoy it.

Update 12/31/10:

Diana Krall --



Ella --



Happy New Year.

Most recent posts here.

Thirty (or so) favorite quotes of 2010

I can't call these the best quotes of the year. But among them are deft turns of phrase, clearly stated truths, and a few revealing lifts of the veil. And most of them were handily accessible in my archives. If I had time to sift through all my 2010 posts I'd find many more which belong here. But I don't, and the list would be too long, anyway. Enjoy, and feel free to add your own favorites in the comments.


The border’s too big. The hole in the Gulf is too deep. The recession is too stubborn. Maybe we should find the president a smaller, easier-to-manage country to govern. You know - send him to the minors for a few years. Michael Graham

Woodward Shock Expose: Unqualified Community Organizer With Teleprompter Dependency Makes Surprisingly Lousy Commander-in-Chief Doug Ross

Jon Stewart on Obama: “I thought he’d do a better job.” You did, huh? Based on what, his extensive experience? Rube. Glenn Reynolds

Meet the Beltway bloodsuckers. They convene in the dead of night, when most ordinary mortals have left work, let their guard down, or are lying asleep in bed. Pale-faced and insatiable, the nocturnal thieves do their nefarious business in backrooms and secret chambers. Their primary victims? Taxpayers, the free market, and deliberative democracy. Michelle Malkin

Rumor has it Christine O'Donnell also loved horses and once played with a Malibu Barbie dunebuggy. Kathy Shaidle

. . . I have to be cautious here, because I believe it’s a condition of my Green Card that I’m not allowed to foment armed insurrection against the government of the United States. . . . But with that stipulation, I think we will be pushing the temperament of the people in a revolutionary direction, and that is something that the Republicans ought to understand. Mark Steyn

I went into the process thinking that green homes were ugly because hippies have bad taste. That turns out to be nothing but a coincidence. The problem is deeper. Scott Adams

We can't just leave it up to the parents. Michelle Obama

When a reporter asked what kind of complaints he was hearing from fellow leaders, Mr. Obama laughed it off, asking, “What about compliments?” NYT

Another thing we can do for jobs is make toys of me, especially for the holidays. Little dolls. Me. Like maybe little action dolls. Me in an army uniform, air force uniform, and me in my suit. They can make toys of me and my vehicle, especially for the holidays and Christmas for the kids. That’s something that would create jobs. Alvin Greene

Are we really such an advanced nation that even an extreme "staunch social conservative" has to deny opposing pornography? There's something depressing about that. Mickey Kaus

You might care more about porn when you have kids. Steve Jobs

Barack Obama is a Class Warrior with every fiber of his being. And he isn't happy.  Daniel Henninger

This is a small man. Jim Hoft

I don’t have a degree in psychology, but I think lies are like lies. Jennifer Rubin

Because once you establish the principle that the state has the right to police ideas, sooner or later one of yours will catch their eye. Mark Steyn

Don’t ask! It’s hell. I can’t stand it! Michelle Obama, allegedly

But community organizers, though often charismatic, can also be annoying jerks. Daniel Henninger

But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it. Nancy Pelosi 

Lindsey Graham getting hot for cap and trade is like watching your parents do the twist. It’s embarrassing, and it isn’t half as hip as they think it is. Mark Steyn

Damn him and his awesomeness. The Hyacinth Girl

Obama loses the support of Christopher Buckley. Apparently ObamaCare is not elegant enough or something. Backyard Conservative

The Romans hated Carthage above all because its people sacrificed their infants to Ba’al. For the Romans, who themselves were a hard people, that was a unique kind of wickedness and barbarism. As a nation, we might profitably ask ourselves whom and what we’ve really been worshipping in our 40 million “legal” abortions since 1973. Archbishop Chaput

An enjoyable slow decline is apparently preferable to a short, but painful rethinking and rebirth. Victor Davis Hanson

Let's give a shout out to our prolific Catholic brethren. I think Mr. and Mrs. Middle America need to take each other's hand and head to the bedroom. No joke. snaggles

Hamas is a mental illness masquerading as a nationalist movement. Mark Steyn

This being a democracy, don't the Democrats see that clinging to this agenda will march them over a cliff? Don't they understand Massachusetts? Well, they understand it through a prism of two cherished axioms: (1) The people are stupid and (2) Republicans are bad. Result? The dim, led by the malicious, vote incorrectly. Charles Krauthammer

Booo-hooo, Obama, put on your big-boy pants or get out of the White House. Weasel Zippers

Maybe his “eloquence” wasn’t eloquence at all but a short list of buzzwords and New Age window dressing meant to disguise a candidate with a thin resume and limited repertoire of executive skills. Just wondering. Jennifer Rubin


I've saved my three favorites for last:

Ain’t that a kick in the head, ladies? The Pill has not only increased your potential for STDs and infertility, but also increased the chances you’ll marry a loser. RS McCain

This is not an election on November 2. This is a restraining order.  PJ O'Rourke

Please go. Bill Clinton


Many thanks to Mark Steyn for the link.

***

Bear with me. This is fun. A few more:

Her voice quivering, she asked, "Is this Styrofoam?" Robin of Berkeley

There is only one thing worse than one-party autocracy, and that is one-party democracy, which is what we have in America today. Thomas Friedman

Octopus Paul is “a symbol of all that is wrong with the western world.” Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

. . . the American voters have indulged in a violent but purgative episode of reverse peristalsis with respect to the Obama-Reid-Pelosi stew of statist, high-tax, politically correct European-style government bureaucracy.  Roger Kimball

When they resort to impenetrable legislative monstrosities to implement their own will without our consent — indeed, over our objection — that is not governing. It is dictating.  Andy McCarthy

What is so strange about the idea that President Obama might be a socialist? Stanley Kurtz

*Thanks also to William Jacobson for linking, though he was inexplicably not among the quoted. Had I done this properly and methodically he would no doubt have been here.
Also linked by Larwyn -- thanks!
Likewise, Backyard Conservative, RS McCain, Milton Wolf, Bride of Rove, and Ol' Broad. Many thanks and Happy New Year.

Most recent posts here.

A little end-of-year entertainment from Ezra Klein

Must-reads of the day:

1) Doug Ross gives Ezra Klein a history lesson. What EK said:

[The Constitution] has no binding power on anything. And two, the issue of the Constitution is not that people don’t read the text and think they’re following. The issue of the Constitution is that the text is confusing because it was written more than 100 years ago and what people believe it says differs from person to person and differs depending on what they want to get done.

Klein tried to clarify his comments in the Washington Post but Ross remains unconvinced:

Bzzzt! Wrong, schmuck!

Everyone with an iota of intellectual curiosity knows the history of the New Deal and how great swaths of it were ruled clearly unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. It was only after FDR's threats to stack the Supreme Court -- to bring four new Elena Kagan members to bear -- that the Democrat president was able to bully the High Court into egregious rulings like Wickard vs. Filburn.  [. . .]

You read that right: a cowed Supreme Court, which had been blatantly threatened by FDR, ruled that a farmer growing wheat for use on his own farm was engaging in interstate commerce.

A more outrageous court decision you'd be hard-pressed to find.

Wickard, in particular, opened the floodgates to expansive interpretations of the Commerce Clause, never before contemplated in American history and certainly foreign to the principles enunciated by the Framers in all of their writings.

Read the rest.

2) Juxtapose that with Iowahawk's rendering of what the Constitution means to Ezra:

According to Wikipedia¹, the Constitution was discovered over 100 years ago, but is still going strong today. It was discovered by the "Founding Fathers" such as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Benjamin Franklin, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and so forth. Although we often call them the "Founding Fathers" there were many women who were also important in this process who have been far too overlooked. Although these people are now mostly passed away, we still remember them for their importance.

Et cetera. RTR.


Many thanks to Michelle Malkin for the link. 
Most recent posts here.

The old way was better

Society used to know this stuff* without studies. Now we need evidence of societal or personal benefits to justify what was once the cultural norm. Here's a study of couples which shows that holding off on physical intimacy correlates with a fulfilling relationship in several ways. And the longer they waited, the better. The numbers are striking:

Relationships fared better and better the longer a person waited to have sex, up until marriage, with those hitting the sack before a month showing the worst outcomes.

Compared with those in the early sex group, those who waited until marriage:

• Rated relationship stability as 22 percent higher
• Rated relationship satisfaction as 20 percent higher
• Rated sexual quality as 15 percent better
• Rated communication as 12 percent better

This observation is also striking:

"Curiously, almost 40 percent of couples are essentially sexual within the first or second time they go out, but we suspect that if you asked these same couples at this early stage of their relationship – 'Do you trust this person to watch your pet for a weekend many could not answer this in the affirmative' – meaning they are more comfortable letting people into their bodies than they are with them watching their cat," Busby said. 

Why is that? Why are people eager to make themselves so vulnerable to perfect strangers? Do they value themselves so little? Are they driven by a desperate need to connect with another human being? To fill the void? Or has sex devolved into just another thing to do, like bowling, or taking a walk? Help me out in the comments.

The Daily Mail reports on the study here.

*Related: Mary Quartarone knew what she was doing.

Hat tip to AS and Hot Air headlines.

Most recent posts here.

Steyn's year-end wrap (audio)

No, he doesn't rap it, but after his disco record, who knows? -- maybe that'll be next.

Hugh Hewitt runs Mark through a ten-minute analysis of the stories of 2010. Click here to listen, here to read.

A few highlights:

HH: Afghanistan – progress or peril?
MS: Afghanistan, I think, we have lost our war aims. And without…you cannot win a war unless you have war aims. And simply passing out Viagra so that the warlords can pleasure themselves with their child brides, and turning a blind eye to the grotesque pederasty of Pushtuns in the Kandahar area, the United States is getting sucked into a very dark place in Afghanistan.

HH: The Tea Party movement.
MS: The Tea Party movement is absolutely critical to the United States, because I think we are in a very perilous place where we are sliding off a cliff. We’re not talking about mid-century. We’re talking about the next two to five years. And without the Tea Party, the urgency of what’s going on would never have made itself known to the broader electorate.

HH: The triumph of Modern Family as the new Seinfeld, the new colossus on television.
MS: I’m wary about that. I think what we are seeing in U.S. pop culture is really a kind of very dangerous social engineering. Hollywood celebrities didn’t live like the rest of America in the 1920’s. But they understood in a way that you cannot have an entire society living like Hollywood celebrities. The amount of human wreckage caused by the destruction of the non-modern family, the boring, prosaic family, is a tragedy for the United States.

HH: Rescue of the Chilean miners.
MS: Impressive, and shows that the United States, whose technology rescued those miners, that we are still technological leaders in the world. How long that will hold once we slide off the fiscal cliff, I think, is a very interesting question.

HH: Justin Bieber as cultural colossus.
MS: Well, you know, I must say, I think I’ll pass on this one, because I am outraged that the idea that a guy like Justin Bieber outsells my disco version of Marshmallow World. There’s no justice.

Among the other short takes: Elena Kagan, Jeff Bridges, Oprah, Bristol Palin, Scott Brown, Wikileaks, Israel, and of course, Barack Obama. 

Most recent posts here.

Exploding bag attracts attention of airport security

Their first clue there was something dangerous in the bag: it exploded.

Perhaps I'm overreacting to this. It was just a little explosion, and no one was seriously hurt. But something is fundamentally wrong with the system when a bag containing explosive materials has to actually explode in front of workers as it's being loaded on a plane in order to be detected by airport security:

A man has been arrested after FBI and TSA officials said his luggage contained volatile gun parts, which caused his bag to explode Tuesday just before it was about to be loaded on a plane.

The unidentified 37-year-old man had 500 to 700 bullet primers in his luggage. Primers are considered the "spark plugs" of a bullet and ignites the gun powder, projecting it toward the intended target.

Officials originally said the exploding bag was caused by a hairspray aerosol can.

The situation turned out to be much more serious and could have been even more dangerous if the bag containing the combustible elements would have exploded while the plane was in the air.

The Miami-Dade bomb squad was called to the airport around 11:30 a.m. after a baggage handler said he was taking luggage to an American Airlines plane that had just arrived from Boston and a bag exploded, sending pieces of metal flying.

The FBI confirmed the passenger and the exploding checked bag got on the flight in Boston and the luggage was being transferred to another flight headed for Jamaica.

The 148 original passengers from Flight 2585 had already departed the plane before the incident.

Officials believe when the baggage handler sat the bag down on the ground, it caused one of the bullet primers to rupture and explode, which ignited a chain reaction among the other tiny pieces of metal.

The worker was not seriously injured, but the words "explosion" and "airplane" can't be used in the same sentence without the terror alert going up a few notches. Officials took one of the baggage handler's shoes, which had a piece of metal lodged in it, and called in the bomb dogs.

After clearing the tarmac, investigators determined there was no bomb on board, but instead one of the passengers would have to answer for the hazardous cargo.

Seems to me he's not the only one who has some questions to answer. How about airport security? Passengers are put through invasive pat-downs and screenings (which have never once caught a would-be terrorist) while explosives are blithely loaded onto a plane. What, pray tell, is the point of the big show of security for passengers and carry-ons when a person can check a bag containing literal explosives?

The less trusting among us might look at this dysfunctional security system, in which alert, courageous fellow passengers and the ineptitude of bombers have proven to be our best defense, and in which Big Brother's overt measures are as ineffectual as they are intrusive and humiliating, and conclude that something is going on here that has little to do with keeping planes and passengers intact and more to do with the our minders showing us who's boss. Case in point here.

Or maybe it's just another government grow-beast. Our bureaucracies are like one left in the glass of water too long. What you end up with is a very unwholesome object, grossly bloated, distorted, and slimy. But in the case of a government bureaucracy, the noxious beast can't be dropped in the garbage. It takes on a life of its own, the main purpose of which is to keep expanding, at our expense.

Most recent posts here.

What do men and women want?

I'll be busy with real-life things today. Here's some interesting reading we could talk about later, maybe:

What do men want?

What do women want?

Most recent posts here.

Berwick and Sebelius sneak end-of-life counseling incentives in through regulation

You don't remember voting for, or against, Dr. Donald Berwick or Kathleen Sebelius? That's because they were appointed and confirmed hastily or not confirmed at all. And now they're able to accomplish through regulatory fiat what they couldn't get through Congress, even with a playing field tilted steeply in their favor. 

Section 1233 of HR 3200 was one of the most controversial features of Obamacare. Though it was passed by the House, it was dropped from the final bill after critics from the right, left, and center called it out as dangerous. I wrote volumes about the provision.

The NYT reports:

The new policy is included in a huge Medicare regulation setting payment rates for thousands of services including arthroscopy, mastectomy and X-rays.

The rule was issued by Dr. Donald M. Berwick, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and a longtime advocate for better end-of-life care.

You might not concur with his idea of what "better" means. Dr. Berwick is the NHS's biggest fan ever.

The new regulation is less specific and therefore less noxious than Section 1233. WSJ:

The draft legislative language on what is known as advance-care planning would have given specific directions to doctors on what they should tell patients, including discussion of palliative care, hospice and other services that could cost less than an all-out effort to prolong life.

The new Medicare rule, issued Dec. 3, is less specific. It says advance-care planning includes a discussion of setting up an advance directive that would tell doctors what to do if the patient is too ill to make medical decisions.

Doctors and patients can also discuss "whether or not the physician is willing to follow the individual's wishes as expressed in an advance directive," it says.

Perhaps the regulation is benign. The WSJ reports that Betsy McCaughey, critic of Section 1233, has no problem with it. So why the secrecy?

[Rep. Earl] Blumenauer, the author of the original end-of-life proposal, praised the rule as “a step in the right direction.”

“It will give people more control over the care they receive,” Mr. Blumenauer said in an interview. “It means that doctors and patients can have these conversations in the normal course of business, as part of our health care routine, not as something put off until we are forced to do it.”

We all know that there's nothing stopping a person from bringing this topic up with his doctor at any time. Why is this so important to Berwick and Blumenauer?

After learning of the administration’s decision, Mr. Blumenauer’s office celebrated “a quiet victory,” but urged supporters not to crow about it.

“While we are very happy with the result, we won’t be shouting it from the rooftops because we aren’t out of the woods yet,” Mr. Blumenauer’s office said in an e-mail in early November to people working with him on the issue. “This regulation could be modified or reversed, especially if Republican leaders try to use this small provision to perpetuate the ‘death panel’ myth.”

Moreover, the e-mail said: “We would ask that you not broadcast this accomplishment out to any of your lists, even if they are ‘supporters’ — e-mails can too easily be forwarded.”

The e-mail continued: “Thus far, it seems that no press or blogs have discovered it, but we will be keeping a close watch and may be calling on you if we need a rapid, targeted response. The longer this goes unnoticed, the better our chances of keeping it.”

See more on Rep. Blumenauer and his cronies, below.

Advanced care planning can be a smart thing for a person to initiate with his doctor. But we're dealing with something different here, as Ed Morrissey points out:

There is, however, something at least vaguely disturbing about a government incentivizing doctors to do so as part of an expansive regulatory program that has, as one of its primary goals, cost reduction.

Let it be noted that Wesley Smith almost predicted this back in August of 2009 when 1233 was dropped:

If the counseling is as important as its supporters have been saying, why not just ensure voluntariness? Why, instead, would the administration rather kill the counseling provision altogether? Maybe they plan to put the provision in by regulation instead of legislation? Inquiring minds want to know. None of this makes any sense if Section 1233 was truly benign. Maybe the “alarmists” were onto something after all.

Yes, indeed. I'll be interested to see what he has to say about the new regulation.

Click here for a flashback to what various critics wrote last year about Section 1233. Of particular interest is this background on Rep. Earl Blumenauer:

Tom McClusky:

The biggest question mark comes from who wrote Section 1233 of the House health care overhaul bill. The original language was written by assisted suicide supporter Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) alongside a group that once was called the Hemlock Society – the nation’s biggest advocates of euthanasia and assisted suicide. The Hemlock Society helped draft Oregon’s assisted suicide law – legislation that has led some afflicted people in Oregon getting letters “consulting” them that, while the state run plan would not pay for their cancer treatments, the state would be happy to pay for assisted suicide if they choose that option.

Additionally, Section 1401 establishes the Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research. A similar center was established in the economic stimulus bill passed in February. The report issued by the House Appropriations Committee at that time explained what they hoped to accomplish with this “research.”:

“By knowing what works best and presenting this information more broadly to patients and healthcare professionals, those items, procedures and interventions that are most effective to prevent, control and treat health conditions will be utilized¸ while those that are found to be less effective and in some cases, more expensive, will no longer be prescribed. (Emphasis added).”

Five times in various committees there were attempts to ensure that “comparative effectiveness research” is not used for rationing purposes. Each time the Democrats on the committees voted the amendments down.

You get the picture.

By the way, is a real confirmation hearing being planned for Berwick in 2011? At the very least, the new congress needs to defund Berwick's position.

Note: End-of-life counseling incentives are not to be confused with death panels. Where there is government health care, there will be rationing, and rationing of care necessitates government entities, or panels, which will be charged with determining who deserves limited resources. Death panels will be with us if Obamacare is not repealed. 

Most recent posts here.

Doug Ross's Fabulous 50!

No, this has nothing to do with my age, you whippersnappers.

We at P&P are humbled to find ourselves on Doug Ross's 2010 Fabulous 50 list. If ever I were to make a list of favorite bloggers, the indefatigable Doug would be there. He has covered the Obama/Pelosi/Reid statist power grab with breadth, depth, and humor. And he's been very generous with the linkage. Thanks, Doug. And thanks, too, to President Obama. If he weren't such a flaming socialist I'd be cleaning my mess of a kitchen right now instead of venting and worrying about the mess he's trying to make of America.

Congratulations to everyone on Doug's list, all of whom are smarter and more articulate than I, and especially to the excellent Nice Deb, my co-honoree in the "Best Up-and-Coming Political Analysis Blog" category, the awesome Prof. Jacobson of Legal Insurrection, and Diogenes' Middle Finger, co-winner of the coveted up-and-coming snark award. Primo example of his talents here. Oh dear.

Speaking of snark, congrat's also to MOTUS, queen of FLOTUS snark.

(And wasn't it thoughtful of the designers at iOwnTheWorld to create a badge [see upper left] that coordinates so well with my colors? Nicely done!)

I can't wait for the giant check to come. There will be a giant check, right?

Most recent posts here.

Another Obama "charm offensive"?

Today's front-page Washington Post profile of President Obama is supposedly about his newly  "thawing social side." But even the Post has its doubts about his ability to connect with his foes, or even with his friends. Writer Anne Kornblut presents more evidence of Obama's coldness, pride, and misanthropy than she does of a midterm personality warm-up.

Kornblut presents various theories to explain Obama's aloofness. One is that the president is not as bad as critics on the left or the right think he is; he just compares very poorly to that social animal, Bill Clinton.

Another is that he's so secure in his awesomeness that he doesn't crave the spotlight. Yes, really:

Advisers said a more accurate description is of someone simply self-reliant, lacking the insecurity gene that leads other politicians to crave constant attention and seek new acquaintances.

I would bet on the opposite, that he's in so far over his head that he instinctively avoids situations and people that might expose his weaknesses. Hence, all the  "boundaries," evident even in his leisure time:

His frequent golf games the past two years have been mostly limited to a familiar handful of younger aides. 

Yet another theory is that he simply thinks he's better than everyone else:

Some lawmakers see it more as a sign of insularity, if not arrogance. "He doesn't suffer fools, and he thinks we're all fools," one senior Republican member of Congress said

People who don't like other people much, and aren't good at faking it, aren't especially likable themselves. If past experience is any indication, a new Obama "charm offensive" will be light on the charm and heavy on the offensive.

Most recent posts here.

Rejoice Greatly

Merry Christmas, dear readers, to all of you and yours.

Here's something beautiful from Handel, via Sylvia McNair:




Most recent posts here.

Merry Christmas music: An assortment

Regular readers may notice some reruns from last year along with some new things. (Well, maybe "new" is the wrong word.) I hope you'll find something to enjoy.

Charpentier: Kyrie from Messe de Minuit

Corelli: Christmas concerto

Jessye Norman: Gesu Bambino

Vince Guaraldi: O Christmas Tree

Oscar Peterson: Jingle Bells

Diana Krall: Jingle Bells, Let It Snow

Ella Fitzgerald: Sleigh Ride, Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas

Judy Garland: Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas

Peggy Lee: Winter Wonderland 

Chet Atkins: Jingle Bell Rock, Away in a Manger, God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen 

Sinatra: The Christmas Waltz

Bing: Mele Kalikimaka

Frank and Dean: Marshmallow World

Louis Armstrong: Zat You, Santa Claus?

And last but not least:
The Frank and Dean Christmas tree



Most recent posts here.

Mud destroys cars and homes in southern California

See Doug Ross for photos of the devastating inundation of mud that has hit parts of southern California after a week of relentless rain. The mud is 3 to 4 feet deep in places and is now hardening around vehicles and houses. I don't have a handle on the size of the area that has been "mudded-in" but this is a real catastrophe for the people affected. Thanks be to God no one was hurt.

Most recent report:

Many California residents who endured flooding, mudslides and evacuations during a weeklong onslaught of rain must now clean up or even rebuild — and could face the prospect of not being able to spend Christmas at home.

The storm's push across the West left a muddy mess Thursday across Southern California and the threat of avalanches in Nevada, where Clark County officials urged residents of Mount Charleston, near Las Vegas, to leave after snow slides near two mountain hamlets.

The inland region of Southern California east of Los Angeles was emerging as among the hardest-hit areas, especially San Bernardino County,

In Highland, people were literally chased from their homes by walls of mud and water, leaving behind dwellings strung with holiday lights.

They returned Thursday to find as many as 70 homes, some with Christmas presents under the tree, inundated with mud several feet deep.

 (NICK UT/Associated Press)

Many families won't be allowed to re-enter their structurally unsafe homes for the forseeable future. The pictures say it all. Doug suggests a way we can all help.

Edited to add this account from San Bernadino:

The tip of the Christmas tree in Freddy and Karen Hernandez's living room is the only part of the tree that's visible. 

The rest of the tree - and the wrapped gifts beneath it - are buried beneath five feet of solid mud.

Wednesday's storm brought a torrent of floodwater and mud crashing through the first floor of the Bangor Avenue home the Hernandezes have lived in for 18 years. Mud, water and rocks engulfed the tree, the gifts and everything else in the home's first floor in a matter of seconds.

Freddy Hernandez was caked in mud from head to toe on Thursday afternoon. He worked with crews to dig out whatever possessions they could.

"I used to own a home," Freddy said. "Now I own a sandbox."

Read the rest to learn why the family believes this didn't have to happen.

Most recent posts here.

Everybody's waitin' . . .

. . . for the Man with the Bag -- take it away, Kay!



Heh. I like this one, too.

Most recent posts here.

Your death panels in action: the FDA's Avastin decision

Peter Ferrara discusses the FDA's recent revocation of its approval of the wonder drug Avastin for treatment of metastatic breast cancer. The decision reveals the conflict of interest between the ruling class and the most important beneficiaries of health care: sick people. 

The Death Panel's First Murder:

It should be no surprise that most health care spending is actually spent on the sick. That is what health care is for. But that is a big revelation to bloodthirsty progressives in the Ruling Class. In their emerging view, so much could be saved if we would just cut off the costly health care for the sickest and most vulnerable, and they would just fulfill their social responsibility by dying a cheap natural death that would not so burden the glorious Welfare State.

But what else could we better spend our money on but our health and our very lives and those of our loved ones? The progressives in the Ruling Class have their own dark answer to that question.

The rising anti-health care fashion is fueled by the realization of those in the know with access to the levers of power that they can buy far more votes spending all that money elsewhere than on health care for the sickest and most vulnerable. Those suffering from cancer and heart disease are too weak and sick to be relentless, effective political advocates. They may well be dead before they can even vote in the next election. Far more votes can be bought spending that money on younger, healthy voters who will be around a long time to work on, contribute to, and support campaigns and the progressives' Ruling Class political machine. Maybe spend it on more welfare for young families, or on more corporate subsidies for the endless "Green Energy" funding drain.

I call it the political logic of socialized medicine. This is why we see rationing in every other country where the government and politics have taken over the health care system.

But Ferrara sees a solution in Rep. Paul Ryan's Roadmap:

Those reforms would turn all of Medicare into Medicare Advantage, granting seniors vouchers they could use to purchase the private health insurance of their choice. As the above discussion shows, those private insurers would not have the power to ration and deny health care for seniors on the grounds that their health and their lives are not worth the money, which is what is now developing in Medicare.

The growth in payments for these health insurance vouchers is slowed so that seniors may have to pay some more for their coverage over time than under the current bankrupt Medicare system. But funds are provided to protect lower income seniors from these added costs. CBO scores these reforms as achieving full solvency for Medicare, without rationing and denying health care for seniors. This is a big winner politically as well as economically as compared to the Obamacare fiasco. This is what more conservatives need to realize.

Ferrara's entire piece is a must-read.

Also see the Sally Pipes' article which was referenced by Mr. Ferrara.


Most recent posts here.

The mother of all creches

The Neapolitan Praesepio at St. John Cantius in Chicago:

I had heard that the figures were stolen from the church a few years ago, but I'm so pleased to learn now that they've all been returned. Read this blog post for background on the piece and don't miss the video for close-ups of the beautifully detailed figures and setting.

Most recent posts here.

Lame ducks, RINOs, and 'tolerance'

The lame ducks are doing as much damage as possible in their final hours. But they couldn't do it without help from Republicans, who have been complicit in the repeal of DADT, in the sudden caving on the food safety bill, and in the ratification of the START treaty.

Nice Deb has video of a press conference given by GOP senators who are opposed to ramming this weak treaty through the Senate, 111th-style:

Missing are Lamar Alexander, Bob Corker, Scott Brown,  and Judd Gregg, who, for some inexplicable reason, are allowing the Obama administration to rush them into a yes vote on something that should take weeks to debate.

As Senator Graham says, there has never been a treaty ratified during the lame duck session in the history of the country.

The treaty is on track to be ratified today. Disappointing and maddening. Republicans of the 112th congress are going to have to do a lot better than this if they are to gain and retain the trust of voters who have clearly demanded a government accountable to the will of the people. Sen. Lindsey Graham, like the proverbial stopped clock, is correct on this:

"When it's all going to be said and done, Harry Reid has eaten our lunch," Graham said on Fox News radio. "This has been a capitulation in two weeks of dramatic proportions of policies that wouldn't have passed in the new Congress."

William Jacobson thinks things will be very different next year:

Unfortunately, we have numerous weak links, some of whom will be gone in a couple of weeks and others of whom will no longer be links waiting to be broken.

Once the new Senate is seated, two or three Republican Senators cannot bust a filibuster, so the people who have held sway over our political landscape by virtue of their eagerness to jump ship no longer will have any bargaining power.  And nothing will come out of the House worth filibustering. [. . .]

Good riddance to the Bush-era Republican Party.  January 5 can't come fast enough.

As for DADT, read Bob Maistros on the, er, tolerance shown toward those who are opposed to homosexuals serving openly in the military:

Now I’m not sure what role General Amos’ religion – he is an avowed evangelical Christian – plays in his views on homosexual conduct.  But although I generally discuss my views on the subject in public-policy terms – that is, the profoundly negative real-world effects of same-sex relations in areas such as military readiness, public health and social well-being – I’m also deeply influenced by the fact that my faith plainly teaches that they are sinful.

Which, ipso facto, makes derogatory comments directed against me and others because of these religious views – like “Neanderthal,” or “bigot,” or my favorite, “homophobe,” which implies that these beliefs actually reflect a mental illness on my part – hate speech.

Oh yeah.

And you wanna talk “prejudicial action?”  My public expression of faith-based perspectives has already cost me clients and at least one job interview. [Richard] Cohen and others want to see Amos fired for having the courage of his convictions.

Of course they do. The whole point is to change the cultural norm, converting   long-standing, traditional Christian beliefs into "bigotry" and "hate." They're making pretty amazing progress, aren't they?

 FoxNews headline

Many thanks to Michelle Malkin for the Buzzworthy link.

Most recent posts here.

111th Congress: Worst ever?

Historians may debate, but there's much to support a case for the affirmative. Frank Donatelli reviews the power-mad exploits of this outgoing band of despots. Among them:

$800 billion "stimulus"

Why take any time to study the contents when you know exactly what to do? The problem was that most of the money went to states to preserve the jobs of government workers. Some stimulus. The president said it would keep unemployment at 8 percent. It is now near 10 percent.

Cap and trade: Passed by the shameless House only, this monster would have extended the long, sticky, grasping fingers of government into every aspect of American life and business, with very destructive results. Mr. Donatelli:

The goal of the 111th Congress all along was to quietly increase taxes to pay for this spending spree. That was the hidden goal of climate-change legislation. The original bill envisioned massive new taxes in the tens of billions on carbon emissions from industrial concerns. When that failed, more than one member of the 111th Congress was prepared to support a value-added tax (VAT), which was to have been sold as the only alternative to federal bankruptcy.

We noted at the time:

Even if you set aside the following --

• C&T proposes to fix a problem that doesn't exist
• C&T would have no effect on fixing that problem
• C&T would actually hurt the environment
• C&T would deal a body blow to every major aspect of the economy, killing businesses and jobs and increasing prices on everything

-- the provisions in this bill would impose an extreme, unprecedented level of micromanagement and control over our everyday lives.

This disastrous bill served to tip Americans off to the really nefarious intentions of this Congress.

Cash for Clunkers, one of the most transparently stupid, sinfully wasteful government programs ever:

Which disrupted the used-car market, mandated destruction of perfectly usable older vehicles and subsidized purchases of autos, most of which would have been purchased in any case.

Health care reform, the 111th's greatest accomplishment, so wonderful that members tried very hard not to mention it during the 2010 campaign. Rammed through, by whatever means necessary, against the clear will of the people, and always more about massively expanding government power than about "fixing" "health care." Most likely unconstitutional, not that the 111th cared.

What they cared about was aggregation of power.

Financial regulations bill, brought to you by Sen. Chris Dodd and Rep. Barney Frank, which tells you all you really need to know. Ed Morrissey:

Expect more fees on more transactions, including paying premium prices for doing business face to face with bank tellers and other employees.  Banks will start demanding higher minimum balances and start charging higher fees on accounts that don’t make the cut.  Bank of America will lose between $7 and $10 billion just on charges for debit and credit cards alone, money that will get made up by its customers somewhere.

Consumers may not pay the entire price, however, at least not directly.  If you like your local branch, better get used to the idea that it may disappear.  With billions of dollars in new costs landing with a thud on their balance sheets, we can expect to see branches close up entirely — and the jobs that exist disappear along with them.

Et cetera.

Lame duck session
If anyone had any doubt of the 111th's utter contempt for the people they were supposed to represent, their final, power-drunken lurch during the lame duck session made it nakedly apparent. Congress's attempt to force another massive, unread, pork-laden bill down America's throat, in the face of November 2nd's resounding repudiation of just that, was a new low for this Congress. Ever shameless, Senate Democrats proudly list their "accomplishments" here. They richly deserve some form of special recognition for their service.

So get ready to wave bye-bye (or substitute hand gesture of your choice) to the Infamous 111th. We pray to God we won't see its like again soon.

Cross-posted in the Green Room.
Many thanks to Doug Ross for linking.

Most recent posts here.

Steyn hits new high

Listen (to the end) to Mark and Jessica's new musical Christmas card here.  :)

Most recent posts here.

Oh Christmas Tree

Most recent posts here.

Saturday morning various & sundry

A few things, and then I'm really going to finish that Christmas shopping.

David Harsanyi: Coercion isn't commerce

Yet, if this mandate stands, any political group need only cobble together a majority of elected officials, find some open-minded judges dedicated to "doing the right thing" rather than upholding their oath, and government can be handed unlimited power to control not only what we can buy but what we must buy.

Washington would be free, for instance, if it chooses, to mandate we all purchase newspapers (to bolster the public's knowledge!) or salubrious foods (eat well or we all pay). Local governments — the kind that see nothing wrong in banning certain restaurants, for instance — would no doubt be especially interested.

Oh, that will never happen, you radical, hateful, right-wing, Fox-News-crony nutjob.

Read the rest.

Doug Ross: A Picture That's Worth a Million Words
This violation of free-born citizens makes my blood boil. How did we get to this point?

Kevin Williamson: A few words in praise of fear

Something has got into the Republican leadership, and that something is: fear. Wonderful, salubrious fear. For this we can thank the Tea Party movement, for several reasons. The first is that, while our European cousins are out rioting in the street for more and more government spending, the one significant, genuinely popular movement afoot in American politics is demanding the opposite. No Washington poobah wants to get yelled at by rowdy constituents at a town-hall meeting back in the district. They really hate that.

RTR.

Doug Powers: Chris Matthews gets the thrill back
My psyche may never recover from the photo that adorns this post on MM's home page. Click at your own risk.

This little compilation wouldn't be complete without a couple of Narcissist-in-Chief  updates.

Micheal Gerson on how Obama's bulky ego keeps getting in the way.

Jim Hoft: Obama Reads Book to Second Grade Class… His Own, Of Course



Most recent posts here.

Steyn is back!

I knew my obsessive clicking would pay off eventually! Go visit Mark and learn about his upcoming TV and radio stints.

I'm quite excited about this teaser:

And join us right here this Monday morning for more audio entertainment exclusively from SteynOnline.

Will it be another Mark Steyn Christmas Show? Last year's was excellent. I've been listening to it in the car and hoping you've all purchased it, too. It's a Steynian  variety show, with great music, fascinating interviews with songwriters and  musicians, a little pie-making, and more. Steyn fans will not want to miss Mark's singing debut as Papa Noel or his de-lightfully extended duet with Jessica Martin. My youngest, who has read the story of the Trapp Family Singers, was especially interested in the interview with Elisabeth Von Trapp, granddaughter of Maria and Georg. What I wrote last year:

Aside from its intrinsic appeal as a Steyn production, it contains some authentic musical gems by Dorothée Berryman, Monique Fauteux, and Elisabeth von Trapp. I'm looking for Berryman recordings but there isn't much out there. The carol by Fauteux is gorgeous, with the added interest that its lyrics were composed by one of the awesome North American Martyrs, St. Jean de Brebeuf. [. . .]

I've since listened to the entire two hours of Steyn's Christmas show (some parts more than once) and need to mention a couple more highlights:
- Mark's interview with Hugh Martin, composer of Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas, featuring the composer's own poignant rendition of the song.
- Berryman, Fauteux, and Steyn's performance of Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer: Ooh-la-la!

I'm so pleased he's back. Meanwhile, Mark reminds us to say a prayer for Andrew Lawton, a young man he calls "one of the most energetic figures in Canadian conservatism" and who is struggling with some very serious health problems right now.

Most recent posts here.

Books for young readers

I'm shifting into serious Christmas mode (finally) and have little time to post anything topical. But I've written a new RightNetwork post with some specific book recommendations for kids. If you like it, please "like" it, or leave a comment. Thank you.

This might be a good time to recycle my first RN post, Raising Children to be Readers, slightly rewritten:

______________

Raising Readers

As a mother of a large family of eager readers, I can tell you how I think it came about. But first a small caveat: It's not necessary for every child to become a bookworm or a scholar. There are plenty of happy, productive adults out there living meaningful lives that don't feature piles of books all over the house.

Or so they say.

Yet near-universal literacy remains a worthy goal for some pretty obvious reasons (even beyond road signs and texting); and a positive love of reading offers the bibliophile a bonanza of advantages. In addition to the sheer enjoyment it provides, voluminous reading enhances one's vocabulary, spelling, and writing skills, and may very well sharpen the cognitive faculties. And all through a relatively painless process. Conventional schooling tries to enlarge a child's vocabulary by giving him a book full of words and definitions. It tries to turn him into a writer by lecturing on sentence structure and assigning the stultifying three-paragraph essay. But avid reading covers a multitude of academic sins, because a child can't spend a couple of hours with a book every day and not absorb the nuances of the language.

Our family laid the foundation with the basics.

Basic #1: We read to our kids a lot when they were small. Tip: It's best to find books that both you and your child can enjoy. Then, when junior toddles toward you wanting to hear his favorite story again, you won't have to fight off the urge to go hide in the bathroom, because he's clutching the delightful Horton Hears a Who. Not so if it's something like, say, Volume 12: Starring the Number 12 and the Letter S of the massive, and massively unreadable, Sesame Street Giant Treasury. A story limited to words starting with the letter 'S' does not make for a riveting reading experience. (But hey, Gramma's intentions were good!)

Basic #2: We "modeled" reading. That means we lazed around and read our own books when we got the chance. Would you expect a bibliophile to emerge from a book-free household? No. So go ahead and read that twenty-book series. Twice, if you get the urge. It's for the children.

Basic #3: When it came time for the little ones to learn to read on their own, we made sure they understood phonics and got plenty of reading practice. Without practice, some kids will get stuck at the beginning, when the effort is great but the payoff is small. (I have a theory that many people who don't like to read feel that way because it never became easy for them. Why read for pleasure if reading isn't pleasurable?)

At a certain point the new reader may need a gentle push to practice, practice, practice, along with some real page-turners to make it worthwhile. Now is not the time for bland material. Mysteries work well. After a child gets through the fifty or so Nancy Drew or Hardy Boys books, he will be able to read. And he will probably have learned a few new words along the way from the not-dumbed-down language of these older series.

After laying the foundation, the real fun begins: chapter books! Dad made it his mission to feed the family a steady diet of good-to-great books. In his view, books are food for the mind and the soul; why would you fill your kids up with the literary equivalent of cheese doodles?

Every weekend he'd head to the library and come back with stacks of great stuff in all genres. The Wonderful Flight to the Mushroom Planet. Marguerite Henry's horse books. Lassie Come-Home. A Little Princess. The Snow Queen. The Moffats. Little Britches. He brought home plenty of classics, but any book that was well written, didn't violate a child's innocence, and portrayed good and evil as such, merited a read. I could name literally hundreds of titles, because we kept a list of all the children's favorites.

And our own as well. In the process, we parents came to appreciate juvenile literature almost as much as our children. That's a good thing for the kids, too, because if you read what your offspring are reading you've always got something interesting to talk about: favorite (and least favorite) characters, the best parts of the story, the funny or scary parts, good and bad endings, and so on. As the children get older and their reading material gets progressively more adult, the discussions will deepen. And you and your children will come to know one another better.

Good literature feeds the appetite for more, and a child who's been immersed in the good stuff won't be satisfied later on with garbage. Children who love to read will eagerly take on more difficult material as they mature. When the time comes for Plato or Shakespeare or the Federalist Papers, these kids won't be daunted. Worlds that are closed to the non-reader will be wide open to them.

So grab a great book and sit down with your kids. Neither you nor they will ever wish that time had been spent otherwise.

______________


*For a weath of great titles for children, see our Amazon store and EagerReaders.com.

Most recent posts here.

Tax cuts extended

Michelle Malkin:

11:59pm Eastern One minute before midnight, the House final tax deal vote is announced: 277-148. A few boos in the chamber.

Or maybe they were saying: “BOOOOSH!”

Via steveegg, breakdown of the vote by party:
Dems – 139 ayes, 112 nays
Pubbies – 138 ayes, 36 nays

Michelle has the list of the hardcore Republicans who were willing to let the cuts expire and fix it on January 5th. Among them: Pence, Bachmann, Wilson, and my congressman, Frank Wolf.

There are some bitter pills for everyone here, but the bitterest one of all goes to the lefties who despise the "rich" (an ever-changing concept) and live to confiscate their wealth.

Most recent posts here.

Omnibus dies

Porkulus, RIP

From the Corner:
Breaking: Reid caves on Omnibus
The appropriators buckle
McConnell: 'A Victory for the Country'
McCain: 'A Seminal Moment'

“I know this is a seminal moment, because for the first time since I’ve been here, we stood up and said ‘enough.’”

Philip Klein: A victory for the Tea Party:

The reason he didn't have the votes to pass it was was no doubt a result of the pressure put on Republicans by tea party activists who have made it politically untenable to be associated with massive government spending and special favors.

Yes indeed. Long live the Tea Party.

Jennifer Rubin points out a very sweet aspect of this victory:

It is also a major win for the opponents of ObamaCare, who halted a billion dollars in funding for the legislation that they aim to repeal.

Allahpundit, always the buzzkiller, asks:

To make it up to Reid, did they promise to vote yes on another piece of legislation still to come in the lame duck? Like, say, the DREAM Act?

Hmm.

Most recent posts here.

Bring on the paralysis

Please let Sen. DeMint and company make good on their threat to filibuster:

Republicans will paralyze the Senate floor for 50 hours by forcing clerks to read every single paragraph of the 1,924-page, $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill.

Senate clerks are expected to read the massive bill in rotating shifts around the clock — taking breaks to drink water and pop throat lozenges  — to keep legislative business on track, according to a Democratic leadership aide.

The bill is so long that it took the Government Printing Office two days to print it.

Let that be a rule of thumb: no bills that take more than, oh, half a day to print. Michelle Malkin has a compare-and-contrast for you.

 

STACLU on Congress's spend-a-bration:

Pork, pork, pork. It’s enough pork to make a Southside Chicago BBQ joint greasy with envy. Yes, it’s a bacchanalia of pork spending and earmarks in the Omnibus spending bill, for sure, and we now have the database to prove it.

Senator Tom Coburn has posted a Google Spreadsheet data base document on line and there you can see how much the earmark costs us, where it is going, and which of our congressmen asked for the earmark.

There’s One million, five hundred eighteen thousand dollars for animal vaccines in Greenport, New York. There’s three hundred grand for the study of phytoplankton in Boothbay, Maine. Millions going to various drug enforcement programs across the country. Ten mil is being shelled out to the “John P. Murtha Foundation” for… well, just because John was such a prince of a guy. There’s a mil six hundred thou for the “Brain Safety Net,” so that brains can be safe… and stuff. Lots of cash for the study of renewable energy, various road and bridge projects, and educational efforts. Even more cash to the Department of Energy for the “Office of Science” because, well, only government can do science, ya know?

And don't miss the mother of all earmarks, as reported by Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit. We need a new word to describe the arrogance of these guys.

Most recent posts here.

Congress's contempt for voters hits new high

Sure, this has been Congress's modus operandi since Obama took office. But in light of the resounding rebuke of the midterm election, the Senate's monster omnibus bill constitutes the biggest slap in our faces yet. The bill is exactly what the voters rejected on November 2nd. It's 1924 pages and will cost $1.1 trillion. No one has had a chance to read it, but Harry Reid hopes to ram it through in the last hours before Christmas. Does this sound familiar?

RedState has embedded the bill here and invites you to wade into the swamp and see what you can pull out. It's more than our liberal "representatives" are willing to do. The contents unearthed so far are just what you'd expect. Well, maybe "expect" is the wrong word. Who could have seen the $1,000,000 arthropod damage control earmark coming?

Senators Tom Coburn and Jim DeMint are calling for a reading of this atrocity on the Senate floor. DeMint, via Beltway Confidential:

President Obama and Democrats have apparently learned nothing from this November’s election. This nearly 2,000-page omnibus filled with thousands of earmarks shows they are still determined to ram through as much big-government spending as they can in this lame duck session. Americans loudly demanded an end to the runaway spending, but Democrats are intent on raiding every taxpayer dollar that they can grab from the Treasury on their way out of power. This bill also funds the unconstitutional Obamacare law that Americans oppose and have asked Congress to fully repeal. Democrats haven’t given Republicans or the American people time to read the bill, but I’ll join with other Republican colleagues to force them to read it on the Senate floor.

Perfect companion piece to this story, which I swear I didn't see until after I wrote my headline, via HotAir: Gallup: Congress hits new low in approval. 13%.That high, huh?


Many thanks to Michelle Malkin and Doug Ross for linking.

Most recent posts here.

"Giving away" a trillion dollars

It's so frustrating when piles of other people's money are abruptly removed from your grasp. Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) is sounding rather bitter:

“It is academic, OK. The bottom line is that it is a fast moving train and that has become clear and Washington is doing what it is finding easy to do,” he said in an interview with The Hill.

“Once the president entered into that agreement with the Senate Republicans even while talks with the House were supposedly under way, that set the tone for the weekend and now you got Americans excited about a trillion dollars that is going to be in effect given away,” Welch said.

Curse those voters and taxpayers, so "excited" about not being forced to toss more of their money down the government's rat hole next year.


Most recent posts here.

Congress forces Obama to linger in frigid DC

The plan as of now is for Obama to remain in DC until Congress calls it quits:

"I think the President will be in Washington and in the White House for as long as Congress is in session this year," Gibbs said.

But I'm not sure Obama can hold out much longer. It's unseasonably cold here in the DC area. The normal high for this time of year is 48 to 50 degrees. Currently it's 25 degrees with howling 25 to 30 mph winds and a wicked wind chill of 12 degrees, and dropping. Great weather for roofers -- there goes another tile! -- but not so much for hot house flowers who keep their thermostats at 80 and their golf clubs always at the ready.

Sen. Harry Reid's threat to stay in session until the new Congress shoves them out the door on January 5th -- no doubt an empty threat -- is Obama's worst nightmare.

The big buzz in Washington this afternoon is over Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s warning to colleagues that they’ll be working right up until Christmas — and perhaps beyond. Word is that he’ll try to keep the Senate in session until the very last seconds before the new Congress opens on January 5, 2011.

This means more time to pass all the last-ditch political pay-offs and massive expansions of government power, including DADT, the DREAM Act, and a little-noticed land grab omnibus bill which is the subject of my column tomorrow.

The devil never sleeps. Perhaps Obama could deputize Clinton to fill in for him. Think how handy he would have been last Christmas when the president's leisure was so rudely interrupted by a terrorist attempt. It took our Commander-in-Chief  three days to rouse himself enough to make a public statement. And even then he chose to appear tieless, just to remind us that he was still on vacation.

Most recent posts here.

Chistmas cookie time

Once a year the Washington Post justifies its existence with the publication of its  annual cookie section. My kids and I pore over the pictures and look back at the sections we've saved since 2005. Sure, Post writers feature some recipes only a  foodie extremist or traditional cookie hater could love (onion marmalade in a cookie?). But we've found some keepers. My favorite is the Chocolate Peppermint Cookie -- similar to a Girl Scout Thin Mint but without the feminist agenda. This year's recipes for Eggnog Bars and Lemon Ginger Bars look tempting.

Among our traditional favorites are chocolate crinkles, Russian tea cakes (a.k.a. Mexican wedding cakes, snowballs, or polvorones) and ginger snaps. I love thumbprint cookies, too. All of these can be found in the indispensable Betty Crocker's Cooky Book.

I found my disintegrating copy at a library sale, but you can buy a spanking-new one, exactly like the original, from Amazon here. Blurb:

At last, the most requested out-of-print book in Betty Crocker history is available once again–in this authentic reproduction of the beloved 1963 edition of Betty Crocker’s® Cooky Book. An entire generation grew up learning to bake from this book. Now they can share it with their own kids and grandkids. Packed with more than 450 all-time favorite cookie recipes, it includes everything from the most basic drop, bar, and rolled cookies to more elaborate cookies and confections suitable for holidays and entertaining.

And so on. An awesome gift that . . . wait for it . . . keeps on giving. But it really does!

Here's the Crinkle Cookie recipe. Caution: Over-baking will result in hard cookies. Experiment with a couple of test cookies until you get it right. You can't judge doneness until they've cooled. 8 minutes works for us, I think.

Most recent posts here.

Cuccinelli wins Round One

AG Ken Cuccinelli of Virginia:

The first thing I did as attorney general was swear an oath to protect and uphold the U.S. Constitution and that's exactly what we're doing in this case.

Via William Jacobson, the judge finds that Congress went too far:

The unchecked expansion of congressional power to the limits suggested by the Minimum Essential Coverage Provision would invite unbridled exercise of federal police powers. At its core, this dispute is not simply about regulating the business of insurance-or crafting a scheme of universal health insurance coverage-it's about an individual's right to choose to participate. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution confers upon Congress only discrete enumerated governmental powers. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. See U.S. Const. amend. X; Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898, 919, 117 S. Ct. 2365, 2376-77 (1997).  [at p. 37]

On careful review, this Court must conclude that Section 1501 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act-specifically the Minimum Essential Coverage Provision-exceeds the constitutional boundaries of congressional power. [at p. 38]

The judge validated what conservatives have been shouting from the rooftops since this saga began:

Hudson rejected the government’s argument that it has the power under the Constitution to require individuals to buy health insurance, a provision that was set to take effect in 2014.

“Of course, the same reasoning could apply to transportation, housing or nutritional decisions,” Hudson wrote. “This broad definition of the economic activity subject to congressional regulation lacks logical limitation” and is unsupported by previous legal cases around the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.

Indeed, when they came into power, Obama and Congress were positively salivating at the prospect of regulating all those areas, and more. The now defunct cap and trade bill, along with "health" "care" "reform," were to be the means of extending government's reach more deeply into our homes and lives. They rammed through whatever they could, however they could, as quickly as they could. But Americans fought back.

See Nice Deb for a round-up of commentary.

The decision coincides with a new Rasmussen poll which confirms the majority's continued opposition to the Obamacare power grab:

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 60% of Likely U.S. Voters at least somewhat favor repeal of the health care law while 34% are opposed. As has been the case since the law was first passed, those who favor repeal feel more passionately than those who want to keep the law--46% Strongly Favor repeal while just 23% who are Strongly Opposed.

Most recent posts here.