The NY Times discuses a silver lining in the Supreme Courts decison to hear (and presumably endorse) a Federal right to gay marriage:
Gay Marriage Case Offers G.O.P. Political Cover
WASHINGTON — The news Friday that theSupreme Court will rule on same-sex marriagebrought elation from gays and lesbians who are hopeful the justices will grant them the constitutional protections they have long sought.
But another group also saw a possible reason to celebrate if the court does indeed rule that way: Republicans.
If the high court resolves the issue as expected in June, it could deliver a decision that has the benefit of largely neutralizing a debate that a majority of Americans believe Republicans are on the wrong side of — and well ahead of the party’s 2016 presidential primaries.
To have the question disposed of and dispensed with, many Republicans say, could make their opinions on the matter largely moot, providing a political escape hatch that gives them an excuse to essentially say: “It’s been settled. Let’s move on.”
But then again...
With the center-right 2016 hopefuls expressing a certain sense of acceptance that same-sex marriage in all 50 states could be a foregone conclusion, there is an opening for socially conservative candidates like Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor, and Rick Santorum, the former senator from Pennsylvania, to make gay rights a wedge.
The impact of a decision allowing gay couples to marry could also echo beyond that narrow question, prompting greater demands on the right for commitments from candidates about who they would or would not appoint to the bench.
“A decision redefining marriage will highlight even more the importance of Supreme Court appointments,” said Russell Moore, a senior official with the Southern Baptist Convention. “Evangelicals and other social conservatives will want to hear from candidates what sort of judicial philosophy they will look for in making appointments. The usual clichéd slogans won’t be enough.”
Surely the apparent importance of judicial nominees will be affected by just how many of the current justices end up supporting a right to gay marriage. In the unlikely event of a 9-0 ruling, it will be hard for any candidate to insist that they won't nominate softies and activists like Scalia, Thomas and Alito.
OK, 9-0 is not likely - Scalia was unhappy with Lawrence v. Texas and unhappy with Windsor, so he is likely to deliver another blistering dissent this summer. But there were three dissents in Windsor (Scalia, joined by Thomas and Roberts in part, Roberts and Alito) and Roberts will be voting with at least one eye on the history books, so Supreme Court savants can tell me whether the right to gay marriage has a shot at seven or more votes.
DOOM. However they might as well go 7 or so if it is a done deal, as long as it is paired with a 7+ stomping of the ACA.
The reconciliation of gay marriage with sharia will be the interesting decision. ;)
Posted by: henry | January 19, 2015 at 02:40 PM
I hope they make pi equal to 3 in the same ruling. It would save a vast amount of time on calculations and have precisely the same relationship to the natural world. Maybe make tails equal to legs as well, it would be a boon for those wanting to pet five legged dogs.
Posted by: RickB | January 19, 2015 at 02:46 PM
like Roe vs. Wade, settled abortion, that's a relief.
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2015 at 02:50 PM
And Roe v. Wade was 7-2.
I predict the Republicans will bugger themselves with this issue for decades to come.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 03:00 PM
Vegas opened at Seattle give 2 1/2. Money poured in on the Patriots and it's now pick 'em.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 03:01 PM
Narciso,
The distillation of penumbral essence leading to the discovery of the right to kill seems of a different character to me. This is more in the nature of redefining a tax to become a penalty (or vice versa, depending wholly upon wind speed and direction) so I would believe Roberts equal to the task, based upon past performance.
No matter the outcome, opinion of the Wisdom of the Nine Monkeys will remain intact.
Posted by: RickB | January 19, 2015 at 03:04 PM
Color me don't-give-a-flying-fig about gay marriage. But I'm somewhat exercised about the rule of law, and deeply skeptical that there's a right to it enshrined somewhere in the Constitution. Like the "tax" authority that enabled Obamacare, if you can read that into the document, you can read anything in it.
Moreover, I don't really care how it affects Republicans. If the theory is that we have to elect more GOPers so that they can more readily get to the front of the public opinion parade shaped by the cultural elite, my reaction is: meh. I'd happily vote (and canvass) for someone who had a realistic plan to balance the budget. Changing the snouts at the trough? Not so much.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 19, 2015 at 03:12 PM
"deeply skeptical that there's a right to it enshrined somewhere in the Constitution"
There's no question that there's a right to equal protection of the law. Five or more justices can do with that whatever they want, without resort to emanations or penumbras.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 03:19 PM
From the last thread I think Steph made a comment about John Holmes being capable of the alternative daffynition of SMOD. Anybody that saw the movie "Wonderland" (a real movie; not porn) would realize that Holmes had such a major powder problem that SMOD was extremely unlikely. Plus he was a very rotten person who had lots of scumbuckets whom he'd double crossed looking to extract many pounds of flesh. Implausible as it may seem, I think dying of AIDS in a VA hospital was his easiest exit.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 19, 2015 at 03:20 PM
So what is the country’s interest in marriage?
If it is in growing the population, tax law needs to be rewritten.
If it is in encouraging families, it needs to be rewritten slightly differently.
If it has no interest in marriage, get out of the business.
Posted by: sbw | January 19, 2015 at 03:22 PM
There's no question that there's a right to equal protection of the law.
Redefining marriage on that basis requires redefining "equal protection." Unlike Professor Hasen, I eagerly await Justice Scalia's dissent.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 19, 2015 at 03:25 PM
"Redefining marriage on that basis"
They'll uphold it without redefining anything. Hide and watch.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 03:29 PM
There's a historical definition of marriage that homosexual marriage flies in the face of. When you read Jane Austin and she mentions marriage, it wasn't between Lance and Ramon and every non idiot knows that. It's more the Orwellian screwing around with language that bothers me more than anything.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 19, 2015 at 03:29 PM
"There's no question that there's a right to equal protection of the law."
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 03:19 PM
How does State sanctioned gay "marriage" protect anyone from anything? Also, how will it protect my right to not recognize these as true marriages?
Posted by: mockmook | January 19, 2015 at 03:30 PM
I assume Wonderland took its name from the street in Laurel Canyon that led to the street I lived on in the late 70's. Lots of strange goings-on in them hills.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 03:32 PM
They'll uphold it without redefining anything.
Yeah, because "marriage" always meant that. [/sarcasm]
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 19, 2015 at 03:33 PM
CH,
Exploration on the frontiers of casuistry and sophistry doesn't excite you? I can't believe, after the thrill of watching the SkyDragon in flight over the EUnicorns, that you could ever be satisfied with mere reality.
Posted by: RickB | January 19, 2015 at 03:35 PM
The Republicas will benefit by having Obamacare thrown back into the legislature, and gay marraige thrown out of it. My guess is the Supremes will oblige them.
Meanwhile, Santorum and Huckabee and Cruz can all complain and fuss and snarl about this, take each others votes, and allow Walker, who seems a sharper cookie than any one of that trio and who has not invested a lot of himself on this issue, to stroll through the prmaries as the authentic conservative candidate least likely to make the establishment itch.
Posted by: Appalled | January 19, 2015 at 03:45 PM
I think that's correct, DoT.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | January 19, 2015 at 03:45 PM
I'm simply saying what I beilieve will happen, not that I'm happy with it. I'm not. My preference would be that they could find a way to leave the matter to the states.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 03:47 PM
Well, looks like Walker got an agreement on the Kenosha casino. Other tribes (Potowatomi) did not want to share gaming revenues with any competitors, but apparently agreed on something or other here.
Posted by: henry | January 19, 2015 at 03:53 PM
Going full out for Gay Marriage might give John Roberts something to point at to the Left and say "See, I'm for liberal stuff," thus offering him cover and a way to undo his horrendously damaging ruling on ObamaCare.
The next Big challenge then, would be on Islamic Polygamy, but that won't make it up the Supreme's docket for a few years, providing a few years breathing space to hold his finger up and get a read on which way the winds will be blowing then.
Posted by: daddy on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 03:54 PM
New post up that will make you want to tell lamar Alexander this is absolutely not why the Reps one in a landslide in November. http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/fufilling-the-long-ago-prophecy-and-boast-on-conquering-the-west-quietly-thanks-to-the-us-senate/
It's the NCLB rewrite's stated purpose.
Posted by: rse | January 19, 2015 at 03:58 PM
If the robed tyrants decide it on equal protection I hope conservatives are ready to take on hate crimes, speech codes and every other "acceptable" violation of the concept.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | January 19, 2015 at 03:59 PM
Why yes, I noticed that typo and just fixed it.
Posted by: rse | January 19, 2015 at 04:00 PM
I'm simply saying what I beilieve will happen . . .
Concur that's the way the Court will probably decide it . . . but just as calling a tail a leg doesn't make it so, calling gay marriage "equal protection" doesn't pass the specious logic chop.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 19, 2015 at 04:16 PM
I hope they make pi equal to 3 in the same ruling. It would save a vast amount of time on calculations and have precisely the same relationship to the natural world.
RickB,
That gets me wondering again if a good enough SciFi/Math writer could come up with a world like in "Flatland", except based on a "Pi equals 3 land."
I can't see how it could logically fit together. I suspect it would have sharp breaks in it structural wise that couldn't allow for anything to be constructed of it, but perhaps with the warping of Space in the vicinity of some superhuge mass, an author might conceivably come up with a "Pi equals 3 Goldilocks Zone" which space-time warping might allow to exist for some short duration of maybe a billion years or so.
My guess is that if we gave Philip K Dick a hit of Acid and a bottle of good single malt, he could come close.
I had a short story politely rejected 35 years ago by "Asimov's Science Fiction" mag. It would have been fun to sit in a bar asking Ike, "So what about a World like Flatland based on Pi equals 3?", and him probably raising his glasses up and shaking his head, and telling the bartender, "My friend here has had enough."
Posted by: daddy on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 04:21 PM
Another big win for the heartland: "American Sniper" - Middle America's $100M Blockbuster.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/18/inside-the-beltway-american-sniper-middle-americas/
This is another straw in the wind for 2016. How the LIV's and the millenials react to the faux wealth distribution plan next evening may be another.
Rush was spot on today dissing those who keep referrig to taxing the rich to grow the middle class as "robin hood strategy". Robin Hood was an anti-tax pirate who stole back from the pretender King John. IOW's the gubmint.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 19, 2015 at 04:29 PM
I hate to sound a note of dissent but this matters. It does not just redefine what a marriage is. It codifies a redefinition of what a family is.
It is an extension of the left's decades long destruction of the family and will speed that destruction along.
At every incremental step regular people throw up their hands and shrug their "whaddya gonna do" shoulders and a few more tragedies get heaped on top of the rest.
A stable life is pretty frickin tenuous even when all the pins are lined up. When society stands around sucking its thumb while a bunch of creeps sends a stream of bowling balls down the lane the whole country suffers, but it's primarily the kids who get it in the neck.
But they're doing it for the children.
Posted by: Iggy | January 19, 2015 at 04:34 PM
like Roe vs. Wade, settled abortion, that's a relief.
That is precisely the problem with the court making the decision. When the court approved gay marriage in MA, Amy's immediate reaction was "gays are screwed" - because it wasn't done by the people.
They brought it to the ballot in MA and it lost, and the legislature ignored it.
I will say there has been little of not backlash for Amy and Mary.No one in this town even notices that Amy and Mary are gay (including them) , because 1. they are so normal,2.Their closest friends are all straight and 3. they constantly give back. They could care less about the issue - it's more of an annoyance than anything else.
But I would not assume that all the idiots who have dedicated their lives to gay marriage will not find another issue - immediately.
Posted by: Jane | January 19, 2015 at 04:35 PM
daddy,
In your "Flatland" does the ".14159 tribe" who have been discharged, wander around searching for a suitable and welcoming Pi. Where they meet in Greece in the Euler Café where Srinivasa Ramanujan is a barrista?
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 19, 2015 at 04:38 PM
"little or no"
Sheesh
Posted by: Jane | January 19, 2015 at 04:40 PM
Iggy at 4:34:
BRAVO!
Posted by: maryd | January 19, 2015 at 04:40 PM
A full confession: I was once part of an irrational number. It was not what I would ever want for anyone. We were constantly talked about, even when we were present. Actually, most of the time we were present but some people tried to give us even more friends or company than even we could accept without being claustrophobic.
My lineage is lengthy and goes all the way back to the Greeks. Our relatives in China and India had it much easier since they were limited by their oppressive government to only 5 or 7 family members. The Chinese love to limit the number of things you can have or own.
Now I wander and wonder where I am going to end up. But I have a dark feeling I will end up as a Spigot Algorithm much like my mother told me to avoid. This is what happens to you if you are born in Greece without an iPhone or iPad.
Posted by: Pi | January 19, 2015 at 04:51 PM
not really my issue, but what exactly does a "right" to marry add that a right to a civil union provides? other than having the government compel religious institutions how to behave, that is?
Posted by: exdemocrat | January 19, 2015 at 04:52 PM
Why are pies round when everyone knows pi are squared?
Posted by: JerryRigged | January 19, 2015 at 04:55 PM
Shots fired outside Biden's Delaware home.
Probably just some guy properly discharging his shotgun blindly through a door. Nothing to see. Move along.
Posted by: Iggy | January 19, 2015 at 05:09 PM
I wonder how Chris Kyle woiuld respond if he was still alive. But really I wonder if any Hollywood fatboy would open his mouth if he was?
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 19, 2015 at 05:14 PM
Jane Fonda says her Viet Nam photos were a huge mistake and sitting in an NVA anti aircraft battery somehow led many to think she was against soldiers fighting in Viet Nam.
She says it gives her a sad.
Posted by: Iggy | January 19, 2015 at 05:15 PM
everyone wants pi ...
Posted by: e | January 19, 2015 at 05:26 PM
JiB,
Why yes they do JiB, and in my world the Pythagorean's no longer have to murder Hippasus, for revealing the incommensurability of the Square Root of 2, since it's now commensurable.
Iggy, Your 04:34 is excellent.
Posted by: daddy | January 19, 2015 at 05:30 PM
everyone wants pi …
Dear leader Tom M sez it's bad for the body.
Posted by: glasater | January 19, 2015 at 05:34 PM
Reposting from the end of a dead thread a few back:
Troubling that they would even take this case, though I guess it only requires four justices. I guess at least four justices haven't learned the lesson from Roe v Wade that if the Constitution is silent, it should be left to the states or the people.
Maybe Roberts will declare it to be a tax.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 19, 2015 at 05:36 PM
It begins in earnest: Scott Walker Attacks Hillary Clinton and Loses.
Of course, its from Crooks and Liars which is the most hillarious and ironic name for a lefty, democrat supporting blog.
Marc Thiessen @marcthiessen 30s30 seconds ago
This could be the stupidest attack on @ScottWalker yet (and that's saying something) http://flip.it/jthyB
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 19, 2015 at 05:38 PM
The only solution I see is to go the European model, with everyone who wants legal protection required to do a marriage at the local government (county courthouse, etc.) and separate religious ceremonies performed in churches for people who want them, at the discretion of the church.
The litigation will continue, however, because it is my confirmed belief that this is all about gays wanting church approval (to be told they are not sinning) and the current government is all about getting the church to bow to the will of the state.
Posted by: Miss Marple | January 19, 2015 at 05:39 PM
That would be a fine solution Miss M. Thus it will not happen.
Posted by: henry | January 19, 2015 at 05:46 PM
How does the equal protection argument not sanction polygamy?
Posted by: jimmyk | January 19, 2015 at 05:46 PM
I wish the gay marriage issue were left to the states, but that's not where the issue is. From the perspective of political triangulation, it's a complete loser for the right. If I have to explain why it's a loser, then you haven't been paying attention.
The right ought to focus on the many positive planks available and move ahead in that direction. Want to do something about the gay marriage kerfuffle: do so after 2016. The average voter getting their wings clipped by record food and electricity prices doesn't give a flying fuck about Adam and Steve. It's the economy, stupid. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Posted by: Beasts of England | January 19, 2015 at 05:49 PM
lol with all this nerd talk ...
evening everyone.
Posted by: rich@gmu | January 19, 2015 at 05:50 PM
It all began when my father, 7, met my mother, 22, at a bar in Giza, Egypt, when they were involved in building the Great Pyramids. Once, after work one day, they decided to relax with some local wine and one thing led to another and I was born because I am what happens when 7 goes into 22.
Posted by: Pi | January 19, 2015 at 05:51 PM
JiB, they used One Wisconsin Now (SEIU front that has lost to Walker 3times in 4 years) as a source.
Posted by: henry | January 19, 2015 at 05:51 PM
Trying to understand this from the Times article:
a debate that a majority of Americans believe Republicans are on the wrong side of
So that's why gay marriage loses at the ballot box and gets forced on states by judges?
Posted by: jimmyk | January 19, 2015 at 05:52 PM
Simpler times.
Posted by: Tonto | January 19, 2015 at 05:54 PM
Not nerd talk, Geek talk!!
http://www.wikihow.com/Tell-the-Difference-Between-Nerds-and-Geeks
This is how I know I am not a nerd based on the article!
"definition of "nerd" is a four-letter word with a six-figure income"
Posted by: JerryRigged | January 19, 2015 at 05:56 PM
As long as they mandate that all imams are required to perform gay marriages in Muslim mosques, I'm for it. Otherwise, equal protection.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 19, 2015 at 05:56 PM
Roberts with one eye? Dread pirate, indeed.
For those who have forgotten, I give you this preview:
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)
The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.
Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival. Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942). See also Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190 (1888). To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual, and cannot be infringed by the State.
Posted by: MarkO | January 19, 2015 at 05:57 PM
Be nice to nerds, they'll be your boss one day!! ;)
Posted by: Beasts of England | January 19, 2015 at 06:01 PM
The only reason gays have gained so much political power is that they generally have a lot of money.
Why?
No kids!
Posted by: Extraneus | January 19, 2015 at 06:03 PM
Big stink breaking over here is that the Brits have unveiled a new 2 Pound coin, and the image on it is causing controversy because it has King John signing the Magna Carta at Runnymede using a quill, when all research says he didn't sign it, but instead used a seal-stamp:
Magna Carta blunder on £2 coin rewrites history: Image shows King John signing parchment with a quill is a 'schoolboy error'
glaring historical inaccuracy,says the Daily Mail.
Did King John actually 'sign' Magna Carta?
He didn't, sez the BBC .
Here's the offensive coin:
The coin commemorates the 1000th anniversary of King John in 1215 using the Great Seal to agree to the Lords demands.
If only they'd have read their Mark Twain they'd have known that Tom in "The Prince and The Pauper" used the Great Seal to crack nuts---morons:(
And for interest, to educate their readers, the UK Daily Mail publishes this picture, with the following explanation as headline beneath the photo: Historian Dr Marc Morris used Playmobil figures to show how the Magna Carta would have been signed with a royal seal - not a quill

With history presented like that, I'm stunned they made the error on the coin in the first place.
Posted by: daddy | January 19, 2015 at 06:06 PM
"sitting in an NVA anti aircraft battery somehow led many to think she was against soldiers fighting in Viet Nam."
No screaming shit.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 06:07 PM
You know, when I was in school the signing of the Magna Carta was one of the important dates we had to learn in world history, along with the Norman Conquest in 1066.
I bet cash money that very few high school students today know either date or why they are important.
Posted by: Miss Marple | January 19, 2015 at 06:08 PM
Not in my field, Beasts...at least not until I retire from teaching and get back into the tech world...
Posted by: JerryRigged | January 19, 2015 at 06:09 PM
Beasts, I am the boss. What are you implying?
Posted by: henry | January 19, 2015 at 06:16 PM
Well...maybe we can get rid of all the books & movies that had any "broken family" component or a missing mom or dad component...because, who the hell cares.
Your father left when you were a kid?...so what.
I'd also like to see an end to the "single mother" admiration....because....who the hell cares. It was a choice. No big deal. So shut up.
Posted by: Janet | January 19, 2015 at 06:20 PM
daddy,
If you are there tomorrow, you can catch the Chelsea game at 7:45 your time. I'll bet the pub won't be so quiet then.
I use to love the 2 quid coin. It was bigger and was a perfect ball marker on the course. Plus most wines or pints then were 2 quid. Now they are up around 4 or 5 quid. Means more paper money and no jingling pockets.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 19, 2015 at 06:23 PM
MissM, we had to know those rwo dates as well as 732 for Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours. Imagine getting that one into a lesson plan today.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 06:23 PM
Janet,
Sometimes a single mother doesn't choose that. There are a lot of women who had husbands who left. ( I am one of them, but fortunately my children are grown.)
Now if you are talking about women who choose to get pregnant out of wedlock, that is a different story.
There need to be two terms, because the press mixes them together.
Posted by: Miss Marple | January 19, 2015 at 06:23 PM
Michael Moore says he was "taught" that snipers were cowards. Who taught him?
He should read about Carlos Hathcock.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 06:25 PM
We don't care anymore, MM. Marriage is nothing. A family is nothing.
How can having a father abandon a family be a sad storyline, if we've now decided that fathers are optional?
Posted by: Janet | January 19, 2015 at 06:29 PM
Imagine if Geroge Bush had said this.
Matt Welch @MattWelch 3h3 hours ago
Never forget: In last year's SOTU, Obama actually bragged that we're "better positioned for the 21st century." http://reason.com/archives/2014/03/14/mourning-in-america …
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 19, 2015 at 06:29 PM
Danube, I forgot, we had to know that date as well.
college
When I took Western Civ in the mid-70's, my professor was a woman who only had a few years left before retirement. We had to be able to draw a freehand map of Europe and within it place answers to questions.
Examples included the following:
1. Place the outermost limits of the Roman Empire.
2. Draw the boundaries of the Holy Roman Empire.
3. Locate the battles of Tours, Lepanto.
You also had to be able to draw on the map all of the major rivers, the mountain ranges, and the capitals of every country as well as any important cities.
We sure did sweat studying for her tests, because the MAP was on every single test, with questions tailored to the units we were covering.
God bless Elizabeth Selton, because to this day I can draw that map!
Posted by: Miss Marple | January 19, 2015 at 06:36 PM
Well, Janet, I realize a great many people don't care.
I do. And I am not going to give up.
Posted by: Miss Marple | January 19, 2015 at 06:38 PM
The latest Fox poll has Obama at 50%. The RCP Average is 44.5.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 06:38 PM
So Jack,
Do I pull for Chelsea or their opponent? I don't want to root for a bunch of Quidders.
Kiersten behind the Bar here at the Menzies just bailed with her buddies. It's a golf course Hotel a few miles out of town in the boonies. A Soccer Team had checked in 3 nights back, so I asked her tonight about clientele and she said Manchester U was close to staying here recently until they wanted a place more out of the way. I can't imagine a more out of the way joint, but she seemed to know her Football fairly well so I bought it.
Posted by: daddy | January 19, 2015 at 06:43 PM
Whoever's on Janet's committee for a PhD in logic, just vote yes.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 19, 2015 at 06:45 PM
henry-since seiu has caused such a ruckus, perhaps you could see if the right eyes saw this initiative that they are heavily involved in even before Gar Alperowitz?
http://nextamericaneconomy.squarespace.com/participant-bios/
Posted by: rse | January 19, 2015 at 06:47 PM
I cannot say this with more sincerity, Ron Fournier is an idiot.
Posted by: MarkO | January 19, 2015 at 06:47 PM
Agree, MarkO.
Posted by: new lurker | January 19, 2015 at 06:49 PM
Also remember how upset I was over the language of WIOA? Nothing compared to what Lamar AlexAnder is foisting on us for K-12 education?
So glad his presidential runs never went anywhere beyond cleaning out Tenn wallets.
Posted by: rse | January 19, 2015 at 06:50 PM
Over & over again Americans voted to NOT REDEFINE MARRIAGE. While the MFM mocked us many states even passed state constitutional amendments to try & protect marriage.
And the fact is that everyone CAN GET MARRIED. Bob & Steve CAN GET MARRIED but they cannot marry each other because that isn't marriage. Nobody is discriminated against because they CAN get married.
Is the Supreme Court now a word defining operation? Can they change the meaning of any word?
American citizens said NO...what part of that is too hard to understand?
This will make the Supreme Court less respected too. For me, I don't care what THEY say...marriage is between one man & one woman & nothing those 9 people say will change that.
Posted by: Janet | January 19, 2015 at 06:51 PM
The latest Fox poll has Obama at 50%.
Republicans PACs should start showing ads of his follies.
Greek columns? "This is the day..."
Beer summit? "The police acted stupidly."
Reset button, mistranslated no less?
Ipod speeches for the Queen.
On and on, down to:
"If you're down, and troubled, and you need a helping hand..."
I want to see a video montage of this buffoon's greatest hits at the convention.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 19, 2015 at 06:54 PM
The latest Fox poll has Obama at 50%. The RCP Average is 44.5.
I wonder what's responsible for the recent bump?
1) Golfing while an American has his head sawed off by Isis
2) Failing to send anybody to Paris
3) The John Kerry/James Taylor Concert
4) Val Jarrett talking about "the Parade"
5) Holder scoring French Viagra in Paris for Al Sharpton
6) Promising free College to America's dead beats
7) Canceling the Golf Course Wedding of 2 troops in Hawaii so he could play through
8) Releasing 5 more Gitmo Islamic terrorists as the dead were being mowed down in Paris and Camaroon
9) The call for a conference on extreme extremistic extremalism.
10) Rappin' with the Spurs at The White House
They are all good choices, but I'm unable to pinpoint which particular one might have sent his approval ratings soaring. Am open to suggestions.
Posted by: daddy | January 19, 2015 at 06:57 PM
Janet,
The story line for Breeding Julia requires a thug enforcer who claims breeding her for her first Section 8 subsidy as a reward for playing a good knockout game (not picking an armed victim). The thugs only other involvement in her life involves dragging her to a death hut to claim a baby bounty if she becomes pregnant again.
It's not exactly a love story but males do have roles.
Posted by: RickB | January 19, 2015 at 06:58 PM
Official: Cuba terror listing won’t affect US push for embassy, diplomatic ties
Posted by: Extraneus | January 19, 2015 at 06:58 PM
OK, preznit 404 is speaking at BSU Wed. Here's the deal: tix are free but you have to jump through some kind of hoop to get them, (haven't looked into it as I don't care) the doors open at noon but there's no firm time on when he starts. Any guesses on how long he makes the saps wait? I'm thinking two hours minimum. Mrs lyle is no fan but she's on the uni prez's advisory board and is going out of deference to him. As far as I know, I'm off the hook to escort her. YES!!!
Anyone catch the caller from Boise on Rush today? He got quite a reaction from El Rushbo.
Posted by: lyle | January 19, 2015 at 06:59 PM
To share child pornography?
That was my fanciful answer to narciso's question about why so many Hezbollah leaders were meeting -- and thus could be taken out by the Israelis.
I decided that answer was bad enough to share -- and something that could make effective propaganda -- in most parts of the world.
Posted by: Jim Miller | January 19, 2015 at 07:00 PM
The left is incomprehensible:
The American Sniper is a hero not a coward - he did his job and his job was to kill people
By PIERS MORGAN
Posted by: daddy | January 19, 2015 at 07:04 PM
daddy,
If you read the article, you discover Piers Morgans brother is in the Royal Army.
I sent him a note to thank him for standing up for Chris Kyle. Given his political beliefs, it took a lot of courage to do so.
Posted by: Miss Marple | January 19, 2015 at 07:08 PM
He came to my place of work a couple years ago. Everyone was so smitten. Certain people got to meet him and shake his hand, all of whom had to submit their names and get a special ticket ahead of time, as did others who might be close to where the great man was to be.
Oh, it was so wonderful! There are giant pictures of the great event still hanging.
I took the day off.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 19, 2015 at 07:09 PM
Janet and Miss M,
If I may put in my two cents: "single mom" is the most odious term around for describing that state. It implies a condition of hip happiness that is totally incongruent with reality, and in my opinion is one more small steppingstone on the path to trivializing the importance of family.
So I stand with Janet, but totally understand where Miss M is coming from. I believe the problem lies with the leftist effort to define all one parent families as equal, and they are definitely not, as Miss M's story aptly relates.
Posted by: maryd | January 19, 2015 at 07:12 PM
Ugh. I hate when people say "couple years" instead of "couple of years." I also hate when people correct their posts. My bad!
Posted by: Extraneus | January 19, 2015 at 07:15 PM
Ex,
Thanks for that sacrifice.
Piers Mogan, although a douche bag in re guns and American values, and libelous photos (ironically) is a Sussex man i.e conservative v. liberal in Brit politics.
But he is an asshole as far as I am concerned.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 19, 2015 at 07:16 PM
Iffy @ 4:34 - I agree 1,000%.
And I agree even more with this from Jane:
But I would not assume that all the idiots who have dedicated their lives to gay marriage will not find another issue - immediately.
They never stop. Ever.
Posted by: James D. | January 19, 2015 at 07:17 PM
RSE's latest post is horrifying, by the way. And anyone who wonders why I will not ever vote for Jeb (or anyone else who supports CC) should understand why after reading it.
Posted by: James D. | January 19, 2015 at 07:22 PM
Extraneus's & daddy's lists don't make a difference if most Americans don't know about those things.
comment from an Ace post - "Can you imagine if Bush did something like this?
The Late Night shows would be brutal, yet 99 out of 100 Americans will probably never hear of it.
Everyone likes to think the Democrats are playing 3rd Dimensional Chess when it comes to politics, but 90% of it is simply having a media cover for them 24/7."
Posted by: McAdams
or this one -
"If you get your info from the MSM most of what you "know" is not true & most of what you do not know is important." ~ Scott @ Powerline
Posted by: Janet | January 19, 2015 at 07:28 PM
That was a WaPo poll Fox showed with O at 50%. So grain of salt...
Posted by: Old Lurker | January 19, 2015 at 07:32 PM
As my classmate Col. John Ripley once said (on TV, while being interviewed in the field up in I Corps), "killing's my business, and business is good."
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 07:33 PM
his job was to kill people
His job was to kill the enemy . . .
. . . and to kill the enemy before the enemy killed us..
Posted by: sbw | January 19, 2015 at 07:39 PM
This Pope talks way too much about stuff that's not in his job description.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2015 at 07:46 PM
And the one thing that *was* in his job description, he forgot.
Turn the other cheek? No. Punch someone who insults my mother. WTF?
Posted by: Extraneus | January 19, 2015 at 07:48 PM