An investigative reporter has rented the house next to Sarah Palin. Ms Palin takes umbrage. The increasingly implausible Dave Weigel explains that if this were tasteless or rude it would be illegal; since it isn't, Ms. Palin should pipe down.
But assuming he's rented the house near the Palins for some period of time, assuming the Palins know he's there and that he's writing a book, then what, exactly, is wrong with this?
If you have to ask, you've probably never had neighbors.
And this is from the next dimension:
Politicians don't have veto power over who gets to write about them, or how they research their stories, as long as they're within the bounds of the law. It's incredibly irresponsible for them to sic their fans on journalists they don't like.
Hmm - I seem to recall Obama siccing his fans on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. I'll have to check the Weigel archives to see his bitter denunciations of that. Or maybe I shouldn't bother, since the rules are no doubt different for right-wing opinion-mongers who aren't journalists.
Interesting use of the spelling, "siccing." I had always used the alternative, "sicking," but both are correct.
Posted by: peter | May 26, 2010 at 07:04 AM
The ability to overlook and excuse extremely creepy behavior because it isn't illegal per se and admonish the target of said behavior for not ignoring or welcoming it, is something I'm willing for what passes in this country as "the left" to completely own. I challenge the trolls to come up with a conservative example.
Btw peter, if I saw the word "sicking" being used in that case, I'd figure the writer was incorrect.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 26, 2010 at 07:21 AM
It's incredibly irresponsible for them to sic their fans on journalists they don't like.
Don't forget Stanley Kurtz on the radio in Chicago,to hit on a topic (CAC) close to TM's heart.
Posted by: hit and run | May 26, 2010 at 07:42 AM
Let's add...
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/02/defending-presi.html>Rick Santelli
http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0309/Gibbs_takes_swipe_at_Cramer.html>Jim Cramer
Posted by: hit and run | May 26, 2010 at 08:09 AM
Is it also incredibly irresponsible for SEIU to sic their members on BofA executives they don't like?
Posted by: Porchlight | May 26, 2010 at 08:23 AM
It's creepy that he rented that house and creepier yet that anyone thinks it odd or wrong for Sarah to note that angrily.But of course Weigel's implausible..that's why the Post hired him as their conservative voice.
Posted by: Clarice | May 26, 2010 at 08:37 AM
Maybe some bloggers aught to move in next to some of the MSM reporters. We could find out which Dem. friends come and go to their parties and are good friends.
Forget the Dem. candidates...let's look into the lives of the MSM.
I am sick of the media being treated as neutral. The Plame set-up showed me how intertwined the news media & the libs are. A propaganda machine.
Posted by: Janet | May 26, 2010 at 08:40 AM
Porchlight:
Is it also incredibly irresponsible for SEIU to sic their members on BofA executives they don't like?
Where was Obama regarding the BofA exec's home?
He informed the bank execs last year that he was be the only one between them and the pitchforks.
Of course,at the time,Obama was using pitchforks as representative of popular outrage,not professional. But still.
Since the thugs showed up with the pitchforks,and Obama was not there to stand between them and the bank exec's home,I have no choice but to assume that Obama condones their behavior.
Posted by: hit and run | May 26, 2010 at 08:40 AM
good morning!
There is a certain derangement on the Left that allows the most base personal conduct to be applauded. If the Enquirer did this to say, John Edwards, there would be howls in every major paper and on every television station. Speaking of which, how is Barry's squeeze these days?
Does Alaska have paparazzi laws? Isn't there a clause somewhere that allows them to stake bushwhackers out for the wolves?
Posted by: matt | May 26, 2010 at 08:46 AM
Janet,
I think your idea is a great one. We on the right need to start targeting media people for intensive scrutiny and opposition research, exposing all of their lies and ties to top Dems and liberals.
Then we need to ridicule them. Alinksy Rule #12.
Then we need to do the same with the libtards in academia, Hollywood, and the Federal bureaucracy.
Let's see how they like it.
Posted by: fdcol63 | May 26, 2010 at 08:52 AM
matt, Weigel is the Post's "conservative" pundit.
Posted by: Clarice | May 26, 2010 at 08:53 AM
Tom,
I hate to urge work on others, but I do wonder what your search would come up with... any kind of results, bitter or not.
Posted by: LTC John | May 26, 2010 at 08:57 AM
"Is it also incredibly irresponsible for SEIU to sic their members on BofA
executives they don't likethey owe large amounts of money to"?Fixed it for you.
Posted by: Mike Giles | May 26, 2010 at 09:01 AM
Maybe some bloggers aught to move in next to some of the MSM reporters.
We can't afford it; the left generously rewards its propagandists.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | May 26, 2010 at 09:04 AM
I will say this: I read Joe McGinniss's controversial book Fatal Vision (about Jeffrey MacDonald) and I thought it was pretty good. I read it not knowing about the controversy (that McGinniss supposedly tricked MacDonald by pretending to be his friend and pretending he was going to write a positive rather than a negative work).
So who knows. Maybe McGinniss is only playing the muckracker but secretly plans to write a positive book about Palin that will shock the media establishment. Yeah, not likely.
Posted by: Porchlight | May 26, 2010 at 09:04 AM
OT, but interesting. The internals at the White House must be really bad on Obamacare:
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2010/05/25/abcs-jake-tapper-bans-obamacare-from-his-blog/>ABC’s Jake Tapper bans “Obamacare” from his blog
I try to be respectful to both sides. Some find that term pejorative. End of story. Take it up with the WH + Dems.
Posted by: Ranger | May 26, 2010 at 09:05 AM
Good point, Mike Giles.
Posted by: Porchlight | May 26, 2010 at 09:06 AM
Sarah made very good money this year (book, speaking engagements), she should quietly pack up the family and go somewhere with really nice weather for a few months. Let the whacko journo spend his dough and his time for naught.
Posted by: centralcal | May 26, 2010 at 09:08 AM
Some find that term pejorative.
Hey Jake, if the bill wasn't a top to bottom POS, maybe the term "Obamacare" wouldn't be considered pejorative.
What does Tapper want us to call it? What does he consider a neutral term?
Posted by: Porchlight | May 26, 2010 at 09:10 AM
Odd, Ranger, seems like just yesterday, Obama was poncing about with Pelosi in an Obamacare victory dance--his crowning achievement and the launch pad for things like immigration reform and so on and so forth until we'd become the change he was waiting for.
Posted by: Clarice | May 26, 2010 at 09:11 AM
The part of this I find most offensive is the specious logic used here:
Hey, that looks like fun, can I play?How 'bout these:- Can somebody prove to me UFOs don't exist?
- Can somebody show the Earth's warming isn't due to humans?
- Can somebody show George Bush didn't cause 9/11?
This lame burden of proof fallacy is prevalent in many lefty sites, and amongst the press, I suspect because they're rarely called on it. Only the truly lazy or desperate proffer an argument and ask for it to be disproved.But in this case it's more ridiculous than usual. Is McGinniss creepy for renting a house next to the Palins? Well, yeah. Is it then "despicable" to point out that creepiness? Don't see how. And on a facebook page, too (oh, the horror).
Posted by: Cecil Turner | May 26, 2010 at 09:13 AM
if this were tasteless or rude it would be illegal
Yes, because in the minds of the credentialed moronautocracy, all morality must be in legislative form (except, of course, where the law is archaic, like prohibitions on co-habitation before marrage or gay marrage).
Posted by: Ranger | May 26, 2010 at 09:16 AM
C-cal,
That is the best idea I have heard yet. Sarah and her kids should rent a house on the Cape or something for the summer. Let the fool sit there and watch her weeds grow in her flower garden.
Posted by: Sue | May 26, 2010 at 09:20 AM
I left out Todd. Take Todd, Sarah. He's too pretty to leave at home alone.
Posted by: Sue | May 26, 2010 at 09:21 AM
O/T-
Tighten up those seatbelts, the Germans appear to have given themselves an out from doing anything about Greece, or others.
How shocking....
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 26, 2010 at 09:21 AM
According to an update at Hot Air by Karl, Tapper is not banning the use of the word in comments, just by him and his co-bloggers.
Posted by: Sue | May 26, 2010 at 09:26 AM
What does Tapper want us to call it? What does he consider a neutral term?
"Stupid goddamn catastrophe".
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | May 26, 2010 at 09:26 AM
Yes, because in the minds of the credentialed moronautocracy, all morality must be in legislative form (except, of course, where the law is archaic, like prohibitions on co-habitation before marrage or gay marrage).
Or it's a law they just don't want to enforce. Like immigration law.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | May 26, 2010 at 09:27 AM
ABC’s Jake Tapper bans “Obamacare” from his blog
I try to be respectful to both sides. Some find that term pejorative. End of story. Take it up with the WH + Dems.
I can't speak for anyone else,but I tend to use terms including variations on Obama's name pejoratively.
Funny that Obamaphiles (pejorative alert!) agree.
Posted by: hit and run | May 26, 2010 at 09:28 AM
Personally, I think the word "Obama" is pejorative.
Posted by: fdcol63 | May 26, 2010 at 09:35 AM
Obama has no one to blame but himself if the term Obamacare is hurting his popularity. He wanted to take credit for something he had nothing to do with and use his own popularity to help push the bill through congress. Now that his hands off approach and credit poaching have tagged him with something people are growing to really hate, he wants to jetison it. As much as I enjoy seeing him pay for his shortcomings, I say let them jetison the term. It just makes repeal all that more possible, as it won't be seen as a personal attack on him, but just good policy to get rid of the whole damn thing.
Posted by: Ranger | May 26, 2010 at 09:37 AM
Repeal ... Obamabort ... Obamannul
(pejorative alert!)
Posted by: hit and run | May 26, 2010 at 09:40 AM
From the Roberts thread by Bob Denver. What a great sign idea!
Here's a sign idea:
PLUG THE DAMN HOLE
ON THE AZ BORDER
Posted by: Janet | May 26, 2010 at 09:40 AM
Minus 22 at Raz; all-time worst. Among men it's 20-50.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 26, 2010 at 09:44 AM
I don't think he can jettison the term even if he wants to do it. Every frustration any American feels about his/her healthcare can now find a focus. This will apply to any gubmint program in the future even if this bill gets repealed.
=============
Posted by: Great legacy, son; Obama didn't care. Not about you anyway. | May 26, 2010 at 09:48 AM
Some find that term pejorative.
That's the new moonbat talking point. Over at my hate site a lefty appeared out of no where to demand it not be called "obamacare" yesterday. Hell I thought Obama thought it was a crowning achievement. Does he expect us to forget he is behind it?
Posted by: Jane | May 26, 2010 at 09:49 AM
Obama at -22. Could be why they want us to stop using Obamacare to describe the crap he was so proud of a few weeks ago.
Posted by: Sue | May 26, 2010 at 09:50 AM
Great sign idea, Janet. Thanks for sharing.
So the lefties have their knickers in knots over the term Obamacare and Tapper wants to relieve their discomfort. Would he be so considerate to a Republican. Of course not.
Posted by: centralcal | May 26, 2010 at 09:50 AM
Still marching his troops out into the Big Muddy and crying about pressure from the left. His Katrina's going to be the big washout in November.
===============
Posted by: It might be Spring, but that lame duck is hard to swallow. | May 26, 2010 at 09:52 AM
So the lefties have their knickers in knots over the term Obamacare...
But why? They told us it would be WONDERFUL. They told us we'd be so thrilled with what they accomplished that we'd ignore the thuggish process they used to pass it. They often came close to telling us it would put an end to death itself!
Posted by: Rob Crawford | May 26, 2010 at 09:53 AM
Tapper is a hard book to read. He is as left as they come but he is also a professional. He is at war with himself. He wants to see the Obama agenda enacted, but he also wants to report the news. I'm sure he struggles with himself in the mirror each morning. I think it depends on which day of the week it is which side of him wins the battle. Yesterday, the liberal in him won out.
Posted by: Sue | May 26, 2010 at 09:53 AM
Time to start calling him a legal alien.
====================
Posted by: Better, 'natural born alien'. | May 26, 2010 at 09:57 AM
That's the new moonbat talking point. Over at my hate site a lefty appeared out of no where to demand it not be called "obamacare" yesterday.
Too goddamn bad; he was given multiple obvious signals by polls and voters to drop that garbage and pivot to the economy but Preznit McFly had to be the one to ram through this unprecedented awesomeness and secure his spot in the history books.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 26, 2010 at 09:58 AM
Melinda;
This is what the traders are afraid of. Now they will price the uncertainty into the market. It also sounds like those interest rates are bot especially attractive and will do nothing to help Greece actually make a dent in their deficits. A slow motion train wreck.
Posted by: matt | May 26, 2010 at 09:59 AM
The irony I'm enjoying at the moment is that just last week I was resenting the universal use of 'Obamacare', which is now etched onto too big a stone to drop down the memory hole. Chain it to him; puts his hands through it. Stamp it on that broad forehead.
=======================
Posted by: Fame, fame, everywhere, and not a breath to take. | May 26, 2010 at 09:59 AM
If it's as awesome as Obama says it is, why wouldn't he want his name on it?
The "some" in "Some find that term pejorative" must mean the WH message spinners. Seems to me Tapper is outing himself as their tool.
Posted by: Porchlight | May 26, 2010 at 10:00 AM
I'm sure he struggles with himself in the mirror each morning.
Tapper is the enemy. End of story. Ignore it at your peril.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 26, 2010 at 10:01 AM
John Fund has an interesting discussion of Rasmussen and the healthcare program that dare not speak its name:
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 26, 2010 at 10:01 AM
Note again, as you already have, Jake's use of 'WH and Dems'. Really, it's just acknowledging the obvious; Obamacare is highly unpopular and likely to be a huge factor this November along with debt.
==============
Posted by: Next week we won't be allowed to talk about debt. | May 26, 2010 at 10:02 AM
Obamacare being "a big f**cking deal" used to be the exultation of Joe Biden.
Now,Obamacare is "a big f**cking deal" in as pejorative a manner you can get.
Posted by: hit and run | May 26, 2010 at 10:03 AM
Sarah made very good money this year (book, speaking engagements), she should quietly pack up the family and go somewhere with really nice weather for a few months. Let the whacko journo spend his dough and his time for naught.
I think she should get some very large outdoor speakers, and repeatedly play the soundtrack from Home Alone.
Posted by: peter | May 26, 2010 at 10:04 AM
I don't think I've ever used the term Obamacare....gonna start using it now.
Posted by: Janet | May 26, 2010 at 10:04 AM
What does Tapper want us to call it? What does he consider a neutral term?
"Stupid goddamn catastrophe".
I was gonna go with
"Shit for Brains legislation". But that works too.
These people are seriously paranoid about message control.
Posted by: Pofarmer | May 26, 2010 at 10:05 AM
"Can somebody explain to me how this isn't a despicable thing for Palin to do?"
If you have to explain it to him, he's not going to understand when you do.
Posted by: abadman | May 26, 2010 at 10:06 AM
I try to be respectful to both sides. Some find that term pejorative.
I for one have an interest in comity, so to assuage the other side, I will start referring to the law in question as "that piece of shit legislation our asshole President and his anti-American Congressional allies imposed on a public that naturally hated it (having read the bill more closely than the fools, incompetents, and demagogues who passed it), to the cheers of the dwindling band of morons stupid enough to adore this government".
Oh, dang, that's not specific enough. Guess I'll stick with "Obamacare".
Posted by: bgates | May 26, 2010 at 10:06 AM
Hey DOT.
Isn't "Political Class" just another term for Progressives?
Posted by: Pofarmer | May 26, 2010 at 10:07 AM
Hey DOT.
Isn't "Political Class" just another term for Progressives?
Posted by: Pofarmer | May 26, 2010 at 10:07 AM
His 'pressure from the left' on climate is from moneymen puppetmasters. Hoi polloi on the left is just getting confused about climate, as they should given their unreal belief system about it.
===================
Posted by: Make no mistake, this is something he cares about. | May 26, 2010 at 10:09 AM
I swear, I didn't post that twice.
Posted by: Pofarmer | May 26, 2010 at 10:11 AM
Next week we won't be allowed to talk about debt
You mean Obamadebt?
Posted by: bgates | May 26, 2010 at 10:13 AM
Good fences make good neighbors.
Posted by: PD | May 26, 2010 at 10:14 AM
Where's the 'I can see Joe McGinnis from my back porch' jokes. Stalkers earn restraining orders, sometimes lawsuits.
====================
Posted by: Joe, look in your deep pockets. | May 26, 2010 at 10:16 AM
What's Sarah Palin got to hide? lol...
Posted by: bunkerbuster | May 26, 2010 at 10:16 AM
The "Political Class" is basically anyone who works for the government (state, local, or federal). Of course they support Obamacare because it doesn't affect them. They have gold plated government paid for health insurance. Not surprisingly, they see government as a force for good (a reflection of their self identification). They don't understand why people would resent them making more money, getting a much better, government funded retirement, and gold plated health care for life might bother those private sector tax payers who are foot the bill for it all.
Posted by: Ranger | May 26, 2010 at 10:18 AM
Too goddamn bad;
Naw, over there this is the appropriate response:
OBAMACARE!
OBAMACARE!
OBAMACARE!
OBAMACARE!
OBAMACARE!
OBAMACARE!
OBAMACARE!
OBAMACARE!
Well you get my drift.
Posted by: Jane | May 26, 2010 at 10:18 AM
What's Sarah Palin got to hide? lol...
Posted by: bunkerbuster | May 26, 2010 at 10:16 AM
Seriously? This is posted by the guy who was arguing yesterday that its perfectly fine for Obama to keep his birth certificate, grades from undergrad and grad school, his senior thesis, and anything else he damn well pleases secret just cause he wants to?
Devolution into self parody indeed.
Posted by: Ranger | May 26, 2010 at 10:22 AM
Meet secret stalker bunker buster.
==============
Posted by: It all makes sense now. | May 26, 2010 at 10:24 AM
Yeah Ranger! Obama is the one hiding his life. Another example of the reality being exactly opposite of what the MSM tells us.
Posted by: Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt | May 26, 2010 at 10:26 AM
Devolution into self parody indeed.
You have to understand that people like the troll consider Obama a person and Palin subhuman. Thus, Obama is entitled to privacy in matters we've demanded other presidents make public, but Palin is not even entitled to be free from the stalker creeps while at her home.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | May 26, 2010 at 10:31 AM
Ranger, I'm trying to think of a catch phrase; the left increasingly sounds dissonant, ignores contradictions, and minds not absurdity. I use 'Are you being ignorant or disingenuous?' when I believe the argument is disingenuous and am becoming increasingly oriented to therapy, education, or ridicule when I sense ignorance. It's often tough to distinguish in the rote from the march of the living dead.
=================
Posted by: So how about it, bunkerbanged? Please don't whimper. | May 26, 2010 at 10:34 AM
Obamacare
Obamacation
Obamadebt
Obamatarp
Obamareporter
Obamamedia
Obamanation
Posted by: Ann | May 26, 2010 at 10:41 AM
kim-
Another tragic case of "bucket ear syndrome".
Often diagnosed in private consultations through optical recognition of a galvanized bucket covering the eyes and ears of said subject.
A pandemic, at times, rarely gets noticed in time to pick up the medicinal hammers.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 26, 2010 at 10:42 AM
Obamalaws
Obamagration
Posted by: Ann | May 26, 2010 at 10:45 AM
Way to go, Ann!!!!!
I love them all. Obamareporter - YES! Obamamedia - YES!
And, of course, all of the others too.
Posted by: centralcal | May 26, 2010 at 10:46 AM
Obamademic
Posted by: Ann | May 26, 2010 at 10:46 AM
Thanks, BobDenver:
PLUG THE DAMN HOLE
ON THE AZ BORDER
If folks behave on this Memorial Day Weekend and I'm not hauling someone out of some canyon on Saturday, I'll be heading down to the StandWithArizona event at Tempe Diablo Stadium - and that will make a great sign. @RealSheriffJoe is one of the main speakers at this event. I read on some blog somewhere that folks were organizing busses from Dallas and other places for this event.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | May 26, 2010 at 10:47 AM
I'm trying to think of a catch phrase
Why bother? They're pathetic losers that are incapable of being happy. Even when they win they're angry. That's all you need to know in terms of "know your enemy". Any time spent thinking beyond that is a waste.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 26, 2010 at 10:47 AM
DoT, you always bring the happiest news of the day.
Ranger, that's a good analysis but as a political animal, I sense the WH internal polls show ObamaCare is an abatross.
If the Dems were smart they'd start passing "fixes" right now to deal with some of the 20 abominations Prof Jacobson noted, but they won't.
Hit--It's time for one of your super special videos showing Obama when he pressed his stamp on this .IT'S OBAMACARE, STUPID.
Posted by: Clarice | May 26, 2010 at 10:48 AM
"folks were organizing busses from Dallas and other places for this event."
...and I don't think it was SEIU...
Posted by: Bill in AZ | May 26, 2010 at 10:49 AM
Obamacaust.
=======
Posted by: Obamacost. | May 26, 2010 at 10:51 AM
"I'm trying to think of a catch phrase
Natural Born losers
Posted by: Threadkiller | May 26, 2010 at 10:53 AM
Will any of the journo lackeys raise Obamacare at tomorrow's press conference? One might wonder why BOzo scheduled one tomorrow rather than next week after the super fantastic stupendous jobs report will show unemployment climbing over 10%. Perhaps Larry "Honey, I shrank the endowment" Summers and Christine "Principles? What principles?" Romer will be tasked to explain the "temporary nature" of the permanent increase?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | May 26, 2010 at 10:55 AM
Obamarrhea. The endless words...just words.
Posted by: Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt | May 26, 2010 at 10:57 AM
Thanks, cc.
Had to slap myself to stop. :)
Posted by: Ann | May 26, 2010 at 11:02 AM
Rick-
Can you tell me what I'm missing in this release of New Home Sales? The difference between Seasonally adjusted and Non Seasonally Adjusted, more specifically, and why is there a difference by a factor of 10?
Or am I just missing the "good news"?
(Durable Goods has the same feature, just not the 10X, BTW.)
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 26, 2010 at 11:03 AM
Here's a list of questions that I'd like to see asked, but I know won't be:
Why aren't you going to Arlington Naitonal Cemetary on Memorial Day?
Since the passage of Obamacare, we've discovered that the bill will cost more than you thought and will do many of the things its opponents warned about. Given that it now looks like insurance premiums will go up, employers will drop coverage, and it will cost more than the $1 trillion you said was the maximum cost you would sign, do you still think enacting Obamacare was the right thing to do?
Did you or anyone on your staff offer Rep. Sestak a job to drop out of the Senate race in PA?
When you ran for office, you promised "net spending cuts." Since taking office you have either signed or proposed a nearly 25% increase in Federal government spending. Given that tax receipts are much lower than anticipated last year, do you think it is time to begin the net spending cuts based on the 2007 budget you promised to cut from during the campaign to bring down the deficit?
Posted by: Ranger | May 26, 2010 at 11:10 AM
Personally, I think the word "Obama" is pejorative.
Not to mention a purgative.
I don't think I've ever used the term Obamacare....gonna start using it now.
My suggestion is to flood Kos, PuffHo, and DU with posts lauding the magic of Obamacare. They won't know whether to keep it for reinforcing their crappy law, or ban it for using unacceptable language.
Posted by: Soylent Obamacare | May 26, 2010 at 11:12 AM
tasked to explain the "temporary nature" of the permanent increase?
Well Rick, I think I can safely predict that it was "unexpected".
Posted by: Soylent Obamacare | May 26, 2010 at 11:14 AM
Obamaspill. Obamatrina.
I say it's Obamacare, and I say the hell with it.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 26, 2010 at 11:17 AM
You know this is the most transparent administration ever. If they were going to have a press conference they of course would have it late Friday on a long weekend.
Posted by: Jane | May 26, 2010 at 11:18 AM
I wonder if Weigel is aware of this:
I think Palin has a right to be concerned that a writer with this vision of the biographic art has chosen to move in next door.
LUN
Posted by: Appalled | May 26, 2010 at 11:18 AM
HI, SOYLENT! Heading off for a few days starting tomorrow--It's the Wolverine's Fifth Birthday.
Todd Palin and his friends have almost competed a 14 foot fence separating their property from McGinniss. I expect if he climbs over it, they'll announce an early start to wolf hunting season.
Posted by: Clarice | May 26, 2010 at 11:22 AM
Mel,
The SA number is annualized, the NSA number is actual sales for the month. The drop in median sales price (9.5%) in the NSA table indicates the level of participation by first time buyers taking advantage of the expiring tax break. It looks like about 10K units were stolen from future sales (if we play annualization, that would be 120K). That little phony jiggle is going to exacerbate the deflationary signal in the CPI next month.
Durable goods indicates that the right leg of the 'V' recovery was successfully amputated by BOzo and the Clown Posse. Uncle Ben better kick the presses up to Warp XV pretty quick.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | May 26, 2010 at 11:23 AM
Mel,
The SA number is annualized, the NSA number is actual sales for the month. The drop in median sales price (9.5%) in the NSA table indicates the level of participation by first time buyers taking advantage of the expiring tax break. It looks like about 10K units were stolen from future sales (if we play annualization, that would be 120K). That little phony jiggle is going to exacerbate the deflationary signal in the CPI next month.
Durable goods indicates that the right leg of the 'V' recovery was successfully amputated by BOzo and the Clown Posse. Uncle Ben better kick the presses up to Warp XV pretty quick.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | May 26, 2010 at 11:23 AM
From CBS:
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 26, 2010 at 11:25 AM
Oh, I get it. The first amendment allows someone to be a stalker.
Actually, the proper response is to laugh at the journo-list. Then to encourage other people to laugh at the journo-list.
Imagine the people driving by, pointing, and laughing. Imagine people taking pictures of other people laughing, with the house in the background.
Posted by: sbw | May 26, 2010 at 11:28 AM
C'mon Rick, get with the
newspeakprogram: Just like in "funemployment", it's not "deflation" but "wheeflation".Posted by: Captain Hate | May 26, 2010 at 11:32 AM
Weigel actually links to an article with this description of McGinniss:
Let's see. A man passionate about his work. Who wants to really push the envelope. Who thinks a biography of a public figure is an appropriate vehicle for his ruminations. Who moves in next door to write his book.
Um, I think a public figure who wants a zone of privacy for her kids, when faced with some guy who pushes the envelope, gets some right to, shall we say, push the envelope back?
Posted by: Appalled | May 26, 2010 at 11:32 AM
Well, he rented it for nothing, it seems. Unless he plans various shots of the 14 foot fence.
Posted by: Clarice | May 26, 2010 at 11:33 AM
Ah...the Wolverine. My favorite child. Wish her a happy birthday from me and tell her for her sixth birthday I will bring her an Afghan ruby, inside a purse made from the ear of a camel (or a Pashtun, whichever is more readily available).
Kind of a sucky day today. Weather is Obamacast here in Nebraska. Went for a run and my nagging Obamasplints are acting up. Plus I think I'm getting an Obama-grown toenail.
But, I must keep exercising to keep off the Michelle-ulite.
Posted by: Soylent Obamacare | May 26, 2010 at 11:33 AM