Author: Moe_Lane

Movie of the Week: Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.

I watched Scott Pilgrim vs. the World when it came out on DVD, and… it was good.  I understand why it got better reviews than box office, though: it was not your standard romantic comedy.  And… hold on, Spoilers after the fold… Continue reading Movie of the Week: Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.

#rsrh I regret to say, Charlie Cook is wrong.

I like and respect Charlie Cook and his Political Report, but the title of this article (“No Losers Here“) is blatantly incorrect. It’s an article about the two Congressional and two Senatorial national committees… and, in fact, two of them were losers this cycle. Hint: they were the ones with Ds in their acronyms.

To summarize:

  • DCCC. Never mind for a moment that the Democrat/Republican ratio went from 255/178 to 190/241, with prospects for another +3 GOP. Never mind that 62 seats flipped (25% of the Democratic caucus). And never even mind that GOP incumbent losses were in areas that we weren’t grieving to lose. Look at their own admitted battleground. 29 candidates: 17 challengers to GOP-held districts, and 12 recruits trying to hold open seats*. 4 won: 3 challengers, and one recruit.  That works out to a 14% success rate for the DCCC’s Red-to-Blue program… and it should have been 17%: IL-10 was not expected to be a retention for the GOP.  All of those were the ones where the DCCC thought that they had a chance, mind you: the rest of us thought that Van Hollen was being insanely, wonderfully optimistic.  Which he was: and, for the record, all that preparation that the DCCC supposedly made didn’t do diddly.  Convincing more Democrats to not commit suicide via voting at Pelosi’s direction would have.
  • DSCC.  The Democrats had 19 seats up for re-election.  They lost 6 (32%).  The Republicans had 18 seats up.  They lost 0.  Democratic incumbents lost in 2 states.  The Democrats likewise lost 4 open seats, in critical states like Pennsylvania and Illinois.  Worse for the Democrats, they failed to deliver in good prospects like Florida, Kentucky, Missouri, and Ohio – all of which were open seats.  They couldn’t even make the races close in states like Louisiana and North Carolina.  In other words: Menendez completely mucked up his recruitment drive.  He also had to rely on incumbency advantages to avoid losing the Senate, but that’s another post entirely.

And that’s pretty much all I have to say on the subject.  Except that this story should hopefully tell you everything that you need to know about who won, and who lost.

Moe Lane

*Which means close to half of the Democrats’ vaunted Red-to-Blue program was actually Blue-to-Red-and-Let’s-Try-to-Make-it-Blue-Again.

Next step: the War on Irish Coffee.

And, for the record: you can have my Irish coffee when you pull it from my cold, dead hands.

Executive summary: the FDA has informed four companies that caffeine is an “unsafe food additive” when mixed with alcohol.  In this particular case, the drinks being affected are cans of carbonated, caffeinated, and alcoholic drinks… but if you’re wondering what’s the scientific difference between that and a hand-made mixture of coffee, whiskey and whipped cream, the answer’s simple: there isn’t one. This is strictly ‘political’… or more accurately, ‘pandering.’  And if you’re wondering what’s stopping the government from deciding that bars shouldn’t serve Irish or Jamaican coffee – or, God help us, Red Bull and vodka, which is apparently the big club drink now – the answer’s even simpler: nothing.  Nothing at all. If young drinkers start consum[ing] hand-mixed caffeine/alcohol concoctions, the FDA will start going after the organizations that serve them.

Still enjoying that Democratic-controlled executive branch that you helped wish on the rest of us in November of 2008, kids?

Moe Lane (crosspost)

#rsrh Massachusetts suing health care rebels.

The executive summary is that the state of Massachusetts is becoming increasingly engaged in two types of legal actions: going after and fining citizens engaged in acts of civil disobedience by refusing to buy state-mandated health insurance; and defending itself in court against citizens seeking relief from said mandates and fines.  Each requires expensive outside legal counsel – which was probably omitted from the original calculation of ‘free’ universal health care costs, although it certainly should have been.  People often don’t like to be told that they have to engage in commerce and acquire something that they do not, in point of fact, want.  So the lawsuits will continue until morale improves.

This is your future under Obamacare, by the way.  Better hope that federal bureaucrats are more sympathetic to your particular situations than Massachusetts ones are!

Moe Lane

SecTrans Ray LaHood hates your cell phone.

So.  It’s a few years from now.  You’re driving in your car (with a passenger); it’s night, and it’s snowing. You’re out in the middle of nowhere.  One of your tires blows out: fortunately, you’re able to stop before you flip the car, but you’re still out in the middle of nowhere at night in the snow with a flat tire.  But that’s why you have Triple A… so you get out of your car and move far enough away to get a signal on your cell phone, then spend roughly the next hour or so slowly freezing solid as you navigate the tow truck in.

Why?

Because Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood is a complete moron who wants to jam your cell phone, that’s why. Continue reading SecTrans Ray LaHood hates your cell phone.

PBS memory-holes Tina Fey’s attack on conservative women.

One wonders why they bothered.  One, it’s PBS; two, Fey’s comments were in receiving one of those awards that apparently exist solely to give neurotic artists a little external self-confidence; and three, it’s not like Tina Fey wasn’t saying anything that we’ve all drearily come to expect from the American celebrity Left.  To wit:

“And, you know, politics aside, the success of Sarah Palin and women like her is good for all women – except, of course –those who will end up, you know, like, paying for their own rape ‘kit ‘n’ stuff,” Fey said. “But for everybody else, it’s a win-win. Unless you’re a gay woman who wants to marry your partner of 20 years – whatever. But for most women, the success of conservative women is good for all of us. Unless you believe in evolution. You know – actually, I take it back. The whole thing’s a disaster.”

Nonetheless, PBS cut it out of the rebroadcast.  They claim that they didn’t do it for political reasons; they did not also claim that they didn’t do it because starting next January the federal purse strings will be in the hands of some very annoyed politicians with a burning need to cut government spending and no sense of humor about attacks on conservative women; but that’s probably because nobody had the mother-wit to ask.  Which is my way of saying that PBS’ claim was nonsense: they knew very well how people would react to slime like that, so they cut it out forthwith.  Which was a mistake: up to now they didn’t own any part of Fey’s nastiness.  Now they do.

As for Tina Fey: I don’t know about the rest of you, but I am getting tired of being lectured about public policy by my intellectual and academic inferiors, simply because they happen to have more symmetrical faces than mine.

Moe Lane (crosspost)