News. Sports. Fun. Life. (And, it's pronounced muh-DARE-ee)

Welcome to Medary.com
Wednesday, July 29 2015 @ 02:58 PM CDT

View Printable Version

Missouri's legislature deletes its laws.

No, really. (OK, well, no, not exactly, but it's funnier my way.)

Computer Crash Wipes Out Access To Missouri's Laws

"Show Me! Where it's against the law, that is . . . "

"Uh . . . um . . . "

Note to the Missouri General Assembly: Backups Are Your Friends. And Redundancy Works.
View Printable Version

Meant as fiction, not as a manual

Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, as snarked by Glenn Reynolds.

His snark is inspired by the Center for Freedom and Prosperity's Dan Mitchell, who observes the truth that what the Obama Administration is doing regarding Obamacare waivers was almost exactly predicted in a passage from Atlas Shrugged.

Yeah, it's a badly written novel. But it's a chillingly accurate prophesy of what is happening in the United States right now. The only problem is that There Is No John Galt.

"The boys had friends in Washington."

Not at all gemütlich, so not cross-posted to Gemütlich Blog.
View Printable Version

On self detection of bias, and the members of Members

In the matter of Representative Weiner . . . replace his name with "Representative Boehner." If your reaction to the story changes, then you are quite probably reacting to the story in a biased and partisan manner. If it doesn't, chances are that you're being fair and objective.

For the record, I have thought for a long time that Weiner is a dick. And not the kind restrained by underwear. Precisely because he's a shameless partisan---dick.

If Boehner had done what Weiner has done, I'd be calling for his resignation as an embarrassment to his Party.

If Democrats don't loudly call for Weiner's resignation, then they are saying that they approve of that behavior. Which crosses the line from partisan to icky, in my book.
View Printable Version

When communists tell you to rein in government spending . . .

. . . you should probably seriously consider reining in government spending.

James Pethokoukis, in Reuters:
So my advice to the spending hawks on Capitol Hill — of both parties — is to listen to China, stand firm and get something big in return for raising the debt limit. At minimum this would be getting at least $1 in spending cuts for every $1 increase in the debt ceiling, along with the spending caps found in the McCaskill-Corker bill. Even former Clinton economist Alice Rivlin thinks raising the debt ceiling should be linked to a long-term budget plan.
Personally, I'd hold out for $2 in real budget cuts for every $1 in debt ceiling increase, but I'm kind of a budget "hawk" anyway. Actually, my opening position would be about $4 in real budget cuts PLUS $1 reduction in the debt ceiling. That would, in my opinion, be most fiscally responsible--cut spending AND use most of the spending cuts to reduce the debt.

When Communists tell you your government is spending too much, then your government is spending too much. Period.
View Printable Version

This is only a test

Made a change. Checking if it works. If you see this, it did.
View Printable Version

"Dear Congress, Your Credit Application Has Been Turned Down"

Reason.com:
Thank you for your interest in the American Public Trust's Gold Card credit program. Rest assured your application has been given thorough and careful consideration by the American people.

After reviewing the information provided in your application as well as your credit report, we regret to say that we are unable to extend you further credit at this time. The reasons for our decision are as follows:

(1) Inadequate income.Our records indicate that your annual income for the 2011 taxable year was $2,170,000,000,000. You have requested a credit limit of $17,000,000,000,000. These figures exceed the American Public's debt-to-income guidelines for credit issuance.

(2) Excessive spending. The receipts you provided indicate your annual expenditures for the 2011 fiscal year total $3,820,000,000,000, or $1,650,000,000,000 more than your total income for the year. The American Public prefers that its members of Congress maintain a positive or neutral rather than a negative cash flow.

And those are just the first two of the six reasons that the few remaining fiscally sober Americans must, regretfully, decline the credit application request. Go to the link for the rest of the painful humor from the Richmond Times-Dispatch's A. Barton Hinkle.

Let's be clear about this:

IT'S THE SPENDING, STUPID!!!

Via Instapundit
View Printable Version

In contemplating Obama's new Israel policy

I simply recall Jim Geraghty's axiom "All of Obama's statements come with an expiration date."

If the American people let him get away with it, he has sentenced the Israeli jews to a second Holocaust at the hands of the radical Arab Muslims. If we don't, Obama will "pivot" and his minions will archly pronounce that he was "misunderstood" and that "blah blah blah blah blah."

This isn't about Israel at all. It's about Obama. It's always about Obama. But Obama is never the one who suffers the consequences of his actions.
View Printable Version

"The press is what's wrong with the press"

Veteran Washington reporter Sander Vanocur.

Current ABC White House correspondent Jake Tapper is about the only one up there today who's worth the bandwidth, as far as I can tell (outside the occasional Fox News reporter--and even they're sliding). Tapper seems to be the only one up there still interested in asking consistently honest questions and pressing for real answers. The rest of them only seem to want to engage in journalistic fellatio.
View Printable Version

The Law of Attraction, Demonstrated

What's the Law of Attraction? It's this New-Agey idea that "like attracts like." Basically, it gets reified by non-spiritual mystics (i.e. most "progressives" and similar sloppy thinkers) as a Deep Thought. Its the mystical thought that if you think about something, it will happen.

This is of course nonsense on stilts. You can sit around all day wishing to be rich, or thin, or have better hair, or more satisfying relationships, or anything, but if you don't actually do anything which will make those things happen, then they won't. So, while it's true that the thought is necessary for almost anything good to happen, it is not a sufficient condition for it to happen.

Still, a small collection of articles today brought to my mind the Law of Attraction--either as a lesson that you get what you give, or as a cautionary tale that it's probably best to follow the Golden Rule (i.e. do unto others as you would have them do unto you) which is NOT nonsense, but common sense. Of course, common sense is uncommon, which is why we have devised a term to describe it.

OK, on to the links.

The End of an Idea -- Why Affirmative Action Should Stop. Connection to the Law of Attraction: well, "affirmative action" is discrimination. There's no way around that fact, no matter how you try to spin it. And discrimination begets more discrimination. That's human nature. Hell, human beings are desperately eager to see discrimination where there isn't any, let alone where you go out and purposefully do more of it. Discrimination breeds resentment. Resentment breeds distrust. Distrust breeds discord. Discord breeds hate. Hate breeds violence. And so it goes. Where do you stop this vicious cycle? By doing more of it? Oh, yeah, that'll work.

Black Confederates Revealed. This features the wonderful quote (and the author does, from the attached picture, seem to have an enhanced melanin skin content) "I've spent much of my adult life studying various theories of race and racism, and the last few years in a rather intensive mode of study. In all of that time one inescapable conclusion has dogged me: Race is such bullshit." But if you run around wanting to see differences between people, it's guaranteed that you'll find them. That's human nature.

WI Attorney General Releases 100 PAGES of Documented Threats Against Lawmakers During the Budget "Negotiations". "Progressives" constantly project their own biases, fears, and prejudices on their political and philosophical opponents. They are so utterly convinced that their view of the world is absolutely, totally, 100% correct that they are simply unable to formulate the thought that there are others who do not share their worldview. This is why non-"progressives" watch the constant media circus going on all around them with such bemused horror. They see the "progressives'" attempt to portray them like you'd see your own image in a funhouse mirror--hopelessly distorted. This is why I find TV shows like Law and Order utterly unwatchable. Hollywood's depictions of the non-"progressive" worldview have about as much connection to reality as Doctor Who while managing to be far, far more offensive to a huge swath of the American public.

Nearly 20 percent of new Obamacare waivers are gourmet restaurants, nightclubs, fancy hotels in Nancy Pelosi's district. Well, why not? It's what the Tea Partiers would do. Right? Actually, no. The "progressives" know that Tea Party people are different than them, they just do not understand--and it seems are unable to understand--how they're different. So they keep trying to imagine that Tea Partiers are Just Like Them. We're not.

U.S. justified in killing Osama Bin Laden. One area where reciprocity is in fact recognized is armed conflict. If you recognize rules of war, you will be accorded treatment according to those rules of war. If you choose to ignore all rules of war (by, for instance, targeting totally civilian, non-military targets) then you give up any right you might have to use the rules of war in your defense.
View Printable Version

Greenpeace loses its nonprofit status in NZ

Story via Watts Up With That:
Greenpeace in New Zealand have just lost their court appeal to retain their charitable tax status. It seems that legally they’re now viewed as a political lobby group . . .

In a sane country, there would be a lot of this happening. In fact, I'd be all for banning "non-profit, tax-exempt" status entirely. It's too easily abused.

On the other hand, the idea of taxing organizations in the first place is pretty corrupt--it's by definition double (at least) taxation.