It’s easy to call a bill bipartisan if you just change the definition of bipartisan

Nancy Pelosi says the Healthcare bill will be bipartisan, even with no Republican votes:

The top House Democrat appears to be signaling that her party has all but given up any hope of achieving meaningful bipartisan support for a health care reform bill.

“Bipartisanship is a two-way street,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declares in an interview airing Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union.

“But let me say this,” Pelosi continues, “The bill can be bipartisan, even though the votes might not be bipartisan, because they [Republicans] have made their imprint on this.”

While I’ll admit that she raises a good point, it only reinforces how weak the Dems are on this.  Even with full support, they aren’t able to make it what they want.

Advertisements

Tweeting the TN 3rd District Congressional Primary Debate

Debate yesterday; I tweeted it.  Check it out and let me know what you think.  (Apologies for the terrible spelling- I’ve got to work on that if I want to keep this Twitter-thing going).

Mark Steyn on The New Conformo-radicalism

When I was in college we used to joke about the hippie kids, the ones who were “different,” but all in the exact same way.

Why are California police detectives acting like 13 year olds?

East Palo Alto Police Det. Rod Tuason apparently posted the remarks on his Facebook page in response to a friend’s status update, which suggested that gun advocates who carry unloaded weapons openly — which is legal in California — should do so in places like “Oakland, Richmond and East Palo Alto” and not just in “hoity toity” cities.

“Haha we had one guy last week try to do it!” Tuason replied. “He got proned out [laid face-down on the ground] and reminded where he was at and that turds will jack him for his gun in a heartbeat!”

Several comments later, the detective suggested shooting the gun rights advocates, some of whom have carried firearms openly in recent weeks in California’s Bay Area, particularly at Starbucks locations.

“Sounds like you had someone practicing their 2nd amendment rights last night!” Tuason wrote. “Should’ve pulled the AR out and prone them all out! And if one of them makes a furtive movement … 2 weeks off!!!” — referring to the modified duty, commonly known as desk duty, that typically follows any instance in which an officer is investigated for firing his weapon.

Now, I don’t think that this is any real threat to our Second Amendment rights; it’s just some idiot blowing off steam.  But it reveals a shocking lack of respect and forethought by a person who we entrust with protecting that right and others who should have known better. 

OMG! An Attractive Woman!!

That’s a pretty accurate summary of Troy Patterson’s (Slate’s TV writer) “review” of Megyn Kelly’s new FoxNews midday show. 

First of all, it’s a mid-day show.  Which means that we’re not supposed to care about it.  Which he explains, but never provides any explanation (other than the obvious pointed out above) that he (or his readers) should care about it. 

The program itself is not anything special, nor does it need to be. As a midday show, its sole purpose is to keep a stream of information—meaningless and otherwise—flowing at a decent pace. As a Fox News offering, it just needs to throw out some red-state red meat, U.S. commercial grade or higher, every other block.

While he does throw in a few notes about her being an “up and coming” star (although she’s been a FoxNews regular for years, so I’m not sure what that’s all about), it’s pretty clear that his only reason for bringing her show to our attention is so that he can write stuff like this:

Megyn’s Manhattan studio offers a view of Sixth Avenue by way of a video screen and of her legs by way of a clear plastic desk. The desk is positioned atop a map of the 48 contiguous states such that Kansas City would seem to have a good view up her skirt. If it is less than gallant to make such an observation, it is more than fair to believe that Kelly would be OK with that.

My understanding of the concept of “post-feminist,” which Mr. Patterson insists that her show demonstrates, is that a woman can be a woman, including being attractive and feminine, and not have that limit her from being intellectual and reliable. Mr. Patterson’s understanding appears to be “she asked for it by wearing that skirt.”

“He’s off on a frolic.”

USA Today reminds us that the U.S. Supreme Court justices are really old. 

The average age of the nine justices — who range from 55 to nearly 90 — is about 70. Yet the tenor of oral arguments also reflects the sensibility of the bookish types who end up at the marble cloister. As a group, the justices — and many of the lawyers who argue before them — like history and classical music and were baffled by all the fuss when a case involving Anna Nicole Smith, then a reality-show star, came before them in 2006.

In a dispute this term over employees’ duty of “honest services” under a vaguely worded federal law, Breyer tried to show how the law could be taken to extremes. The scenario he spun brought spectators back to a time of fedora-wearing men itching to play the ponies rather than get their work done:

” ‘Do you like my hat,’ says the boss. ‘Oh, I love your hat,’ says the worker. Why? So the boss will leave the room so that the worker can continue to read the Racing Form. Deception?” Breyer queried.

Other justices, including John Paul Stevens, 89, and Anthony Kennedy, 73, raised hypotheticals that involved the timeless practice of skipping out to catch a baseball game. (None of the nine suggested the contemporary scenario of shopping online while on the clock.)

Actually, and I think this article gets this and is mainly meant to be amusing and lighthearted, I don’t think that the age and even “out-of-touch-ness” is a bad thing.  Federal law, constitutional law in particular, should be generalized and timeless; if it’s applicable to yesterday’s tech, it should be applicable to tomorrow’s as well. 
 
We think we’re living in an information age, but we ain’t seen nothing yet compared to what the future will likely bring. 

Bill Clinton Hospitalized, Doing OK

It sounds like they were able to take care of things.  Here’s hoping that he’s OK. 

Former President Bill Clinton was in good spirits Thursday after undergoing a procedure to insert two stents into one of his coronary arteries, his office said.Clinton, 63, was hospitalized at the Columbia campus of New York-Presbyterian Hospital after experiencing discomfort in his chest, according to Douglas Band, counselor to the former president.

Shame that this had to happen now, with all of his Haitian work, but it’s good that he was able to get treatment quickly.