Month: January 2010

Geez, is it Davos time AGAIN?

This is one of those things that I never heard of, pre-blogosphere:

Disputes over how best to reform the global financial system are set to dominate this year’s World Economic Forum in Davos.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy is likely to add to the pressure on banks in a keynote speech on Wednesday.

Numerous sessions on banking reform are expected to see clashes between bankers and regulators.

…and I’m wondering whether I’m better off having an awareness of this event. I’d have about as much chance of getting an invite to it as I’d have of getting to the moon by climbing; and the protests are dead boring. You’d think that it’d be impossible to have a dull protest where tear gas and water cannons are involved, but look at the video. They’re all just phoning it in.

Moe Lane

Admit it: if I pulled out a taser… #rsrh

…and told you that you had ten seconds to explain to me what the heck the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 actually did, how likely would it be that you’d be able to avoid doing your impersonation of a sufferer of St. Vitus’ Dance?

Don’t feel bad: I had to look it up myself (and I would have guessed unemployment benefits, or something).  The Democrats talk of it a lot, but don’t actually talk about it.  The law “amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 stating that the 180-day statute of limitations for filing an equal-pay lawsuit regarding pay discrimination resets with each new discriminatory paycheck.”  Not precisely the New Deal there, huh?

I bring this up because, as near as Jim Geraghty and I can figure out, this is pretty much all that the Democratic party can brag about to its base with regard to the accomplishments of the 111th Congress.  Although if they want to run on the Democrats’ ‘stimulus’ bill I’ll be happy to let them…

Moe Lane

*Yes. This is what they have to work with when it comes to bragging rights.

D&D promotes gang-related activity?

Now, for the record: I’m not particularly upset that this guy can’t play D&D in prison – if for no other reason that you can’t play it without dice, and dice means gambling, and while my brief foray into the topic suggests that gambling may not be universally banned in American prisons I’m not seeing that correctional officials approve of it, either.  Besides, convicted murderer who got life; not exactly the sort that would be in my Friday game, anyway.  So, I’m fine with the ban, more or less, and at least when it comes to this particular case.  What upsets me is that I’m now being invited to imagine what a D&D themed street gang would look like.

Unfortunately, I’m succeeding.

Gee, it’s like Chris Buckley never voted for the guy. #rsrh

“The Audacity of Oops.” Tell me something that I (or Hot Air) didn’t already know. Or something that a lot of people last year didn’t already know; including – and I mention this solely to be particularly offensive to people like Chris Buckley – THAT WOMAN.

You know, it’d be nice if our self-appointed elites would do the rest of us the courtesy of admitting at least the existence of their screw-ups, once they themselves recognize that they engaged in one. I don’t want to necessarily always rub their noses in the consequences of their lapses in judgment; but I do want to whack them on the nose with a rolled-up newspaper, the better for them to understand that elections have consequences.  We’re having some now, in fact.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

Old Narrative: DCCC cash advantage = No GOP gains.

New narrative:

The DCCC’s cash advantage is, at the moment, an important circuit breaker for 2010. For all the factors that point to big GOP House gains, it is the cash disparity could mean the difference between a bad year for Democrats and a really bad year.

At this rate, by June we’ll be hearing how the DCCC’s cash advantage will at least keep the GOP from having enough votes to override Obama’s vetoes next year.

Moe Lane

PS: Do I seem insufficiently anxious and resigned to failure? Well, it might be because I know a trend when I see it. Or maybe it’s because I’m currently on the right side of a 4-to-1 seat defense ratio. Or maybe it’s just that we watched the Democratic party pour quite a lot of money down a hole in Massachusetts.

PPS: More serious question: does the Citizens’ United case make monthly looks at fundraising totals more or less irrelevant? It just got a lot easier to fund promising candidates, on both sides.

PPPS: In a truly just world, there would be another announcement of a Democratic retirement this morning.

Crossposted to RedState.