It is a rejection of climate-change hysteria.
We may work up the gumption to go see it this weekend.
[Update a while later]
Related thoughts from Mark Steyn.
It is a rejection of climate-change hysteria.
We may work up the gumption to go see it this weekend.
[Update a while later]
Related thoughts from Mark Steyn.
Dear Democrats, don’t even think about trying to run away from him.
[Afternoon update]
The epic search of Diogenes for an honest man is over.
[Update a few minutes later]
It gets worse:
I think we’d probably like to get rid of the tax exempt status for health care benefits.
Note that McCain proposed doing just that in the 2008 election. His idea was that we would get rid of this exemption and instead give people an additional tax credit valued at the average cost of health insurance. Thus, people would be held harmless by the change, but we’d get rid of this government-made distortion in how employers pay their employees.
Barack Obama, get this, demagogued that plan and accused McCain of wanting to increase taxes on people.
And meanwhile, he schemed to achieve the same thing, except without that part about giving people an additional tax credit which would offset increased taxes, and, get this, without telling people he was getting rid of the tax exemption.
Once again — subverting democracy by completely destroying the concept of Consent of the Governed.
All in a day’s work.
[Update a while later]
Obama himself was leading the discussion of how to take away the tax benefits.
It would be a huge improvement over the current mess:
I think that from the libertarian perspective, either of these proposals should be preferable to Obamacare. I’d even argue that they should both be more appealing to progressives. But the administration didn’t want simple, modest and stable; it wanted a massive, transformational legacy. Which is why, four years later, we’re still fighting about it.
Yup.
Over at Av Week.
[Update a few minutes later]
Hmmmmm…this seems a little off:
“…is not to be moved into the unlock position until acceleration has reached Mach 1.4.”
Mach 1.4 is a velocity, not an acceleration. I know what they mean, but this kind of sloppiness in writing a procedure doesn’t look good.
I’ll be on today, from 9:30 to 11 AM PST.
[Update a few minutes later]
The call-in number is 1-866-687-7223.
My thoughts on what it all means, over at PJMedia, with some bonus @ISPCS coverage and history.
Congress won’t like this. Insufficient opportunities for graft.
Note the implicit acknowledgement that they’re going to be using Falcons.
Sounds like he didn’t have any new information for the NTSB, but I’d still like to hear his description of the engine burn and vibration environment. Note, it doesn’t say he doesn’t remember the feathers being unlocked, but that he was unaware of it (i.e., cognizant of his experience right up until breakup).
[Update a few minutes later]
Andy Pasztor has the problematic history of the program. I haven’t read it yet.
[Update a while later]
OK, the WSJ piece seems to line up pretty well with my own understanding of the history. I talked to Jon Ostrower last week to give him some background, and he seems to have incorporated some of what I told him, though he didn’t quote me. Which is fine.
It’s not the way it used to be.
Longer ago than I care to think about (OK, four decades or so), I regularly visited a place out in Holly, MI to scrounge parts for my British sports cars. Every other time or so, when I’d go out, and come back with the part I needed, the owner (or manager) would ask me if I wanted a job. The last time I did it was in the nineties, when I went to a place on Hawthorne Blvd in Hawthorne to get a distributor for my Honda Accord, whose shaft had sheared off on the 405 in Orange County.
An ObamaCare architect freely admits they had to lie to the voters to get the law passed. They assume that the voters are stupid, with some basis, since they continue to get re-elected. So it’s a shock to them when the ones who really care and know what’s going on show up at the polls, as they did last week.