Comic books continue to push social, moral boundaries

I've known for many years that comic books, once the prized domain of young boys, have become adult-oriented, seemingly determined to go out of their way to shock the sensibilities of the older generations. Still, articles like this news.com.au one cause me to do a double-take (and cause me to wonder how this represents a step forward for our culture):

SHE first swung into action 50 years ago, helping her boyfriend Batman rid Gotham City of villains until she was killed off in 1979.

Now Batwoman is making a comeback, replacing Batman - who is missing, presumed dead - in the popular DC Comics series.

And this time around the superheroine's alter ego, Kathy Kane, is a red-headed lesbian.

Billed as a "lesbian socialite by night and a crime-fighter by later in the night", the new Batwoman is clad in a figure-hugging black outfit with knee-high red stiletto boots.

She is set to appear in at leasty 12 issues of the Detective Comics, the first of which will appear in June, the BBC reports.

"We've been waiting to unlock her - it's long overdue," DC Comics writer Greg Rucka said.

"Yes, she's a lesbian. She's also a redhead.

"If people are going to have problems with it, that's their issue."

Great Expectations: Did we just elect Willy Wonka?

Kidthing teamed up with the nonpartisan, nonpolitical National Education Association to present the hopes and dreams of our children to their dear leader, Barack Obama, as the Associated Press reported yesterday:

End war, forever. Make the planet greener. Please help my dad find work. Make it rain candy!

Thousands of kids detailed their hopes and expectations for President Barack Obama in letters and drawings as part of a worldwide project, with 150 chosen for a free e-book being released on Presidents Day.

Most had tall orders for the new guy in the White House.

Anthony Pape, 10, of Du Bois, Pa., offered: "I hope that we will have no war ever again. I mean why are we fighting why can't we all be friends."

Fellow 10-year-old Sasha Townsend of Soquel, Calif., had a similar request, and then some.

"I would appreciate it if you would try to make this a greener planet and try to bring home the troops and end the war," the fifth-grader wrote. "I am very luckey because I am not part of a military family, but it saddens me to hear about all the people who die in Iraque and know that somewhere In the world people are greiving over a lost family member."

Seven-year-old Aaron Van Blerkom's letter was simpler — but no less problematic.

"Dear Mr. Obama," the Pasadena, Calif., first-grader began, "Please Make it rain candy!"

As we read the article, we find that the fondest hopes and dreams of our nation's youth align quite nicely with the Democratic agenda.

Even the part about raining candy -- something Obama and the Democrats are attempting to do with the economic stimulus.

Abomination of Legislation passes House without GOP support -- Not entirely noble, but still the right choice

ABC News today:

The House passed the $787 billion economic stimulus bill by a vote of 246-183, although a week of negotiations and lobbying by President Obama failed to convince a single Republican to support the bill.

Instead of voting for the gargantuan package of tax cuts and public works spending, key Republicans made last ditch speeches denouncing the bill. Seven Democrats also voted against it.

House Minority Leader John Boehner, in explaining GOP opposition to the bill, says something rather curious:

"It's disappointing the way this process has worked, and the outcome," House Minority Leader John Boehner, waving the bulky report in his hands, said on the House floor. "Bad process leads to bad policy and that's what we have in my view. ... I hope it works but I surely have my doubts. ... This is the epitome of what I came here to stop."

"I'm going to vote no and I'm going to hope that next time. ... You'll include us and you'll include our ideas," the Ohio Republican said, clearly addressing Democratic leaders.

Am I reading this correctly? Is Boehner saying that this abomination of legislation is the result of bad process? That if, somehow, the Republicans and their ideas had been included in the process, they wouldn't be united in opposition?

Suppose that House Dems had included the Republicans, and that many Republican "ideas" ended up being included in the final bill -- let's say the final result was 40% Republican ideas and 60% Democrat ideas. Would the 40% the Republicans got be enough to get them to vote Yea, in spite of the mindboggling shortcomings of the 60% the Democrats got?

If you've got a better "spin" on Boehner's remarks, I'd love to hear it.

And now, it's on to the Senate, where it's almost certain that the GOP opposition will not be unanimous.

What Congress thinks qualifies for emergency funding

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell highlights some of the lowlights of the "stimulus" bill. Apparently, things like these are so critical to our economy's survival that, as President Obama assures us, "we don't have a moment to spare" in rushing this bill into law.

Taxpayers Take Home “$8 A Week” While They Pay Billions For Golf Cart Tax Breaks, New Cars For Government Bureaucrats, ACORN-Eligible Block Grants, Fish Hatcheries, An Arts Endowment, And The Census

*** Due to the unfinished nature of the product currently available for review on the House Rules Committee website, page numbers are likely to change.

• Tax Benefits For Golf Carts, Electric Motorcycles and ATVs: (Pg. 60 of the Tax Division of Conference Report, lines 9-16, “(2) SPECIFIED VEHICLE.—The term ‘specified vehicle’ means any vehicle which—‘‘(A) is a low speed vehicle within the meaning of section 571.3 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of the enactment of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009), or ‘‘(B) has 2 or 3 wheels.”)

• $300 Million For Federal Employee Company Cars: (Pg. 90 of the Appropriations Division of the Conference Report, lines 7-13, “For capital expenditures and necessary expenses of acquiring motor vehicles with higher fuel economy, including: hybrid vehicles; electric vehicles; and commercially-available, plug-in hybrid vehicles, $300,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011”)

• $1 Billion For ACORN-Eligible Block Grants: (Pg. 261 of the Appropriations Division of the Conference Report, lines 11-18, “For an additional amount for “Community Development Fund” $1,000,000,000 to remain available until September 30, 2010 to carry out the community development block grant program under title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.)”)

• $50 Million For An Arts Endowment: (Pg. 143 of the Appropriations Division of the Conference Report, lines 11-25, and lines 1-3 of Pg. 144, “For an additional amount for “Grants and Administration”, $50,000,000, to be distributed in direct grants to fund arts projects and activities which preserve jobs in the non-profits arts sector threatened by declines in philanthropic and other support during the current economic downturn: Provided, That 40 percent of such funds shall be distributed to State arts agencies and regional arts organizations in manner similar to the agency’s current practice and 60 percent of such funds shall be for competitively selected arts projects and activities according to sections 2 and 5(c) of the National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 951, 954(c)): Provided further, That matching requirements under section 5(e) of such Act shall be waived.”)

• $165 Million For Fish Hatcheries: (Pg. 133 of the Appropriations Division of the Conference Report, lines 21-25, and lines 1-2 of Pg. 134, For an additional amount for “Resource Management”, for deferred maintenance, construction, and capital improvement projects on national wildlife refuges and national fish hatcheries and for high priority habitat restoration projects, $165,000,000.”)

• $1 Billion For The Census: (Pg. 36 of the Appropriations Division of the Conference Report, lines 1-4, Bureau of the Census, Periodic Censuses and Programs. For an additional amount for “Periodic Censuses and Programs,” $1,000,000,000.”)

TAXPAYERS LEFT WITH “ABOUT $8 A WEEK”

ASSOCIATED PRESS: “Next year, the measure could yield workers about $8 a week.” (“Economic stimulus package on track for final votes,” Associated Press, 02/12/09)

(Via Red State)

Another reason to fear Friday the 13th

How appropriate that on Friday the 13th -- a day associated by many with ill fortune -- Congress is preparing to pass an $800 BILLION "stimulus" bill that is in reality little more than an attempt to stimulate the reelection chances of our senators and representatives (via strategic bribery of the electorate).

Our congressfolks are undoubtedly intimately aware of the sections in the 1000-page bill that are directly related to their pet projects, but it is also quite likely that they have little significant knowledge of everything else that is in there. But, as CNSNews reports today, that won't stop many of them from voting for it [typos in original]:

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) predicted on Thursday that none of his Senate colleagues would "have the chance" to read the entire final version of the $790-billion stimulus bill before the bill comes up for a final vote in Congress.

“No, I don’t think anyone will have the chance to [read the entire bill],” Lautenberg told CNSNews.com.

The final bill, crafted by a House-Senate conference committee, was posted on the Website of the House Appropriations Committe late Thurday in two PDF files.

[...] Both Republicans and Democrats told CNSNews.com they were eager to read the unseen bill--once they could get get their hands on a copy of the final legislation.

Nonetheless, members from both sides of the aisle in both the House and Senate admitted they doubted they would have adequate time to read the bill before they actually voted for it.

“Certainly I hope to have the opportunity to go through [the bill] before the vote takes place,” said Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) told CNSNews.com. “But that’s something I’ve found doesn’t always happen around here.”

Whether from principle or from the fact that this gives them political cover, some Republicans have stated this as one of the reasons they will vote against "Porkulus" (one of the popular derogatory nicknames for the bill on the internet: pork + stimulus = porkulus).

Whatever their reason for voting against, more power to them. This bill must die.


UPDATE: For good measure, here's what Rep. John Shadegg has to say about it over at RedState:

How fitting is it that the stimulus bill is coming to a strong-arm vote on Friday the 13th?

This entire process has been a horror story. The exclusion of Republicans. The pork and paybacks for special interests. The secret, closed-door meetings. The mammoth bill text kept hidden until hours before the vote.

But of course the greatest horror is not the process – it is the product. At the end of the day we have an economic stimulus without economic stimulus. A recovery package that the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office says will shrink the GDP. An historic transfer of wealth and power to the federal government – which the government has no plans of returning to the people.

Commonsense Americans have been expressing their concern, frustration and outrage for weeks. But Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid – and yes, President Obama – have not listened.

With the clock ticking before this vote, we must continue sounding the alarm. We must raise our voices. We may lose the day – but do not let history record that we went down without a fight.

Congressional Switchboard: (202) 224-3121

Go ahead and have another child, you planet-hater

In 2007 we heard about Toni Vernelli, who saw getting an abortion as a moral duty in light of the AGW crisis. We also heard from an Australian researcher who proposed that any family having more than two children should buy what amounts to an excess-child carbon offset to atone for these kids' share in the destruction of the planet.

It's been more than a year, and you just haven't been paying attention, have you? Some of you have even gone ahead and made more babies, haven't you? And let's not even get started on Nadya Suleman, who just birthed octuplets.

Scott Kotler at Psychology Today's blog has a message for you: You're unbelievably selfish, you're a resource thief, and you're a murderer.

Kotler believes that a global population of 2 billion people is the utter limit of sustainability, and that we need to get right on to the task of reducing the human headcount to that level.

His solution: STOP HAVING KIDS FOR FIVE YEARS. Everybody, everwhere. This isn't quite as far-reaching as the solution of the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement, to wit, that we stop having kids forever, but it is extreme nonetheless.

We have spent the past 4000 years trying to shrug off the nightmare that is Biblical advice. We no longer sanction slavery or believe it okay to stone a woman to death for wearing sexy clothing or any of that other nonsense—but go forth and multiply?

Got to be the worst advice in the history of the world.

And sure, a five year ban won’t fix all of this and it raises some questions as well—like how do we insure that year six won’t produce an influx of offspring?

So here’s my answer: Personal responsibility. A grassroots movement means we mean it. It means people having children in year six would feel shame and embarrassment at their unbelievable selfishness.

And yeah, if you are having children right now you are being selfish. You’re stealing. Stealing from the future. Stealing from the rest of humanity. Stealing from every living thing on the earth right now.

[...]

We are soon going to be killing each other over resources, just like we’ve always killed each other over resources—only this next time it won’t be over something to put in our gas tanks. It’ll be over something to put in our belly.

And it won't be an isolated incident, it'll be a global catastrophe.

That’s our future. That’s what happens if we don’t stop having children. In fact, if we don’t stop having children then we’re going to get to meet another bad Biblical idea head on: the four horseman of the apocalypse.

Pestilence, War, Famine, Death.

How can he be any more clear? If you don't get with the program, the death of our planet from climate change will be on your conscience.

(Message cross-posted on The Global Warming Heretic)

Do foster parents have a duty to PREVENT the religious conversion of children in their care?

At least one town council in England appears to think so, as The Telegraph reported February 8. After removing the young woman from foster care, they even tried to persuade her to convert back to her former religion:

A foster mother with 10 years' experience was struck off after a Muslim girl in her care converted to Christianity, it has emerged.
The woman has been banned by her local council for failing to prevent the teenager from getting baptised, even though the girl was 16 and made up her own mind to change religion.
The carer, a churchgoer in her 50s who has fostered more than 80 children, has now been forced to move out of her home.
She has lost the farmhouse she rented to look after vulnerable teenagers, due to the loss of income.
[...]
The foster mother, who cannot be named for legal reasons, insists that she did not pressurise the teenager to convert, and actually tried to discourage her initial interest.
The girl, who is now 17, was taken into care after being assaulted by a family member, saw baptism "as a washing away of the horrible things she had been through and a symbol of a new start," the woman said.
"I offered her alternatives. I offered to find her places to practise her own religion.
"I offered to take her to friends or family. But she said to me from the word go: 'I am interested and I want to come [to church]'."
The carer claims that social services were aware that the girl was attending her evangelical church, and council bosses only objected when she they found out she had been baptised.
[...]
Officials advised the teenager to reconsider her decision and stop attending Christian meetings, and in November struck the carer off their register, claiming she breached her duty of care as a foster parent.
"They consider that in some way she should have taken steps to prevent the conversion," said solicitor Nigel Priestley, who is representing the carer.
He is demanding a judicial review into the council's decision, claiming they have breached Article 9 of the Human Rights Act, which guarantees freedom of religion for both the carer and the girl.
He said that the teenager, who is now back with her parents, was "distressed" that her private faith had had such repercussions, and is supporting her former carer's legal bid.

It is clear that the teen does not regret her decision to convert, but no matter.

Remember: it's not discrimination unless it happens to a politically-favored victim group. Britain's government, bending over backward to show how tolerant it is, takes just about every opportunity it can to atone for the centuries of Christianity's dominance there. It's just not fair that Christianity should continue to dominate -- so the government aims to do all it can to help level the playing field.


(Image stolen from Searching for Liberty)

Our sexist recession

Liberals typically agree with the notion that "disparate impact" is de facto evidence of discrimination. Even if an institution or a policy wasn't intended to discriminate, if one of the politically favored victim classes is disproportionally negatively affected by said institution or policy, BAM! It's discrimination.

The key, of course, is the term "politically favored victim class" -- if the victims are not politically favored, there is no discrimination.

Which is why the following February 6 AHN story is a non-story:

With mass lay offs in the U.S. taking place in the manufacturing and construction sectors, employed female workers may surpass males since 82 percent of the recorded job losses involved men.

Experts attribute the rising male unemployment to more women being employed in the education and health care sectors, which are not as affected with the economic downturn as traditionally male-dominated industries.

If eighty percent of the job losses had involved women instead of men, you wouldn't have to go to a second-tier news site (no offense, AHN) to read about it.

President Obama's ingenius plan to get tax cheats to pay up

Scott Ott notes:

Obama Plan Has Already Boosted IRS Tax Collections

(2009-01-31) — In office less than two weeks, President Barack Obama has already increased tax receipts at the U.S. Treasury with an innovative plan to get tax-dodgers to pay up, in full, immediately.

“The president’s plan is simple but ingenious,” said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, “He targets wealthy individuals who filed inaccurate tax forms, cheating the government out of tens of thousands of dollars. Then he just nominates them for cabinet positions. They suddenly see the error of their ways, and they cut checks for the full amount owed, plus interest.”

In the month of January alone, Mr. Obama has forced Timothy Geithner, former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, to cough up $43,000 he owed the IRS, and former Sen. Tom Daschle to pay off his $128,000 tax obligation. Mr. Geithner will put his tax-paying experience to good use, overseeing the IRS as Secretary of the Treasury. Mr. Daschle hopes his recently-good behavior will garner Senate confirmation as the next Secretary of the Health and Human Services.

Hey, Hollywood! Time to walk the talk!

Writing for Big Hollywood, blogger Iowahawk pokes fun at movie stars whose lifestyles belie their claims to be concerned about the environment:

A Go-Green Guide for the Hollywood Community

More than ten years after the Kyoto accords, our planet continues to careen helplessly toward certain environmental destruction. The skies are choked with pollutants. Adorable helpless polar bears plunge through thinning ice caps. Ben Affleck still can’t find a decent comeback project.

The signs are ominous, but it’s not too late to do something. As a member of the entertainment community, you are uniquely qualified to save our planet from coming climate disaster. But it will take more than raising awareness — it will take action. Have your personal assistant add these 10 to-dos to your Blackberry, and let’s get the Earth on the road to recovery!

1. Reduce Water Consumption. One single dripping faucet or flushed bidet may not seem to be much of an environmental threat, but those numbers really add up when you’re hosting an NRDC fundraiser for Laurie David and all 10 of your bathrooms are in use. When possible, encourage guests to pee in the pool, and remind them that “if it’s yellow, let it mellow.” Unless you’re serving asparagus canapes.

2. “Green Begins At Home.” Whether you live in East Hampton or Topanga Canyon, there are dozens of little things you can do around your compound to reduce your carbon footprint. For instance, tell your groundskeeping crew to plant a tree. Save your leftover foie gras to grow your own homemade organic Botox. Turn off your energy wasting security cameras between 1 AM and 7 AM. If you own a vanity cattle ranch in Montana, email the trail boss and tell him/her to add Beano to your herd’s feed to reduce ozone-depleting methane emissions.

3. Upgrade To a New Gulfstream G550. Next time you take off for Cannes or Sundance or that big Environmental Defense Fund gala, stop and think how much fuel that clunky old G450 is using. Not only does the new G550 have real burled walnut and 10.8% better fuel efficiency, it has smoother ride — meaning 20% fewer annoying turbulence-related Cristal and cocaine spills. And with a maximum cruising speed of Mach 0.885 you’ll never be late for the red carpet at the Palm d’Or!

4. Crush a Third World Economic Development Movement. One of the most pressing threats facing our environment is rising income in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. A generation ago these proud little dark people were happily frolicking in the rain forest, foraging for organic foods amid the wonders of nature. Today, corrupted by wealth, they are demanding environmentally hazardous consumer goods like cars and air conditioning and malaria medicine. You can do your part to stop this dangerous consumerism trend by supporting environmentally progressive leaders like Hugo Chavez and Robert Mugabe, and their programs for sustainable low-impact ecolabor camps.

The remaining suggestions are well worth the read.


(Cross-posted at The Global Warming Heretic)

Reports of Narnia's demise are exaggerated: Dawn Treader is back!

The LA Times' Entertainment News & Buzz blog brings us the good news that 20th Century Fox has rescued the third Narnia movie, Voyage of the Dawn Treader, from potential oblivion:

Twentieth Century Fox has agreed to co-finance the third movie in the “Chronicles of Narnia” series, pending approval of the final script and shooting budget. If all goes as planned, Fox and Walden Media, which controls the movie rights to C.S. Lewis’ classic children's books, hope to be begin production on "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader" by late summer so it will be ready for holiday 2010 release.

First, however, Fox and Walden have to hire a screenwriter to do another pass on the script that was last rewritten by Richard LaGravenese, whose credits include "Freedom Writers" and "The Horse Whisperer." The movie companies are looking to make the film for about $140 million. Michael Apted, who made "Amazing Grace" and the 1999 Bond flick "The World Is Not Enough," is on board to direct.

Fox is taking a financial gamble that Disney was unwilling to wage despite helping bankroll the first two films in the "Narnia" family franchise. Walden, owned by entrepreneur Phil Anschutz, was forced to seek a new financial partner on “Dawn Treader” after Disney balked at the cost and opted out.

Fox was the most likely partner because the studio already markets and distributes Walden movies under its Fox Walden label.

NarniaFans.com's Paul Martin adds that "[t]he goal is to get back to the magical aspects present in the first “Narnia” pic but mostly absent from “Prince Caspian.”"

Lucy and Edmund's real-world counterparts are growing quickly, so here's to hoping that there are no further delays.

For those unfamiliar with the story, the book opens with this wonderful line:

There was a boy called Eustace Clarence Scrubb, and he almost deserved it.

I'm looking forward to seeing how they portray Eustace in the movie version.


(Image credit: HarperCollins)

We can dream, can't we? 'Rangel Rule' would eliminate IRS late fees and interest

I know that Rep. Carter is doing this with tongue in cheek, but I think this is a far more effective way to highlight hypocrisy in Congress than simply issuing press releases would be.

Fox News, January 28:

Americans may be able to rest a little easier this April if Congressman John Carter, R-Texas gets his way.

Rep. Carter introduced a bill Wednesday to eliminate all IRS penalties and interest for paying taxes past due.

The legislation calls for the creation of what he calls the, "Rangel Rule," -- drawing attention to the recent legal issues of House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., enabling citizens who fail to pay taxes on time to do so later with no additional fees.

Rangel, who writes the country's tax policies, acknowledged last fall that he failed to pay thousands in real estate taxes for rental income he earned from a property in the Dominican Republic.

As of September 2008 the Harlem Democrat reportedly paid back more than $10,000 in taxes but that did not include any IRS penalties.

"Your citizens back home should have the same rights and benefits that come to you as a member of congress. You shouldn't be treated any differently under the law than your citizens back home," Carter said.

He added that citizens should receive the "same courtesy" that the IRS is allegedly granting Rangel and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, who also recently acknowledged a failure to pay taxes.

(Photo credit: NYT, 9/10/2008)

Property taxes and pain tolerance

Forbes has published a Tax Foundation table ranking 788 U.S. counties according to how much is paid in property taxes as a percentage of household income. The rankings are based on data from the 2007 U.S. Census American Community Survey.

New York and New Jersey take top honors in the quest to consume the largest portion of the citizens' hard-earned money: 22 of the 25 highest counties! And yet, people still consent to live there, and -- most likely -- keep voting for the folks who imposed the levies on them in the first place. Why?

#1, Passaic County in New Jersey, taxes away 8.5% of its citizens' median income. The rate for my county is less than half of that, and it is is apparently below the pain threshold of the majority of the voters. I sometimes complain about my property tax bill, but I expect that I would squeal like a stuck pig if I was presented with a bill like the ones that the citizens of New York and New Jersey routinely pay.

If you are a property owner in one of the top-ranked counties, I would love to hear your thoughts about your property taxes, and about the general attitude of your fellow citizens there.

Conservatives can make their case without resorting to propaganda, can't they?

Newsmax (January 22) brings us an interesting factoid about the Obama inauguration:

Obama Inaugural Ratings Fall Short of Reagan’s

Although the number of viewers watching the presidential inauguration coverage of Barack Obama was impressive, they fall short of those who saw Ronald Reagan take the oath of office for his first term in 1981.

According to Nielsen Media Research, 37.8 million television viewers tuned in Tuesday to watch the swearing-in ceremony, which was the largest inaugural audience in 28 years. Reagan's first inauguration in 1981 drew a whopping 41.8 million.

Yaaaay! Reagan beats Obama! Take that, liberals!

Four paragraphs later we get this oh-by-the-way:

The ratings do not, however, include the huge online viewing audience, with CNN.com, FoxNews.com and MSNBC.com all reporting record-breaking streaming video traffic. Google reports that searches were down during the event.

The online audience was enormous (I was one of the countless folks trying to access CNN's live stream), making the article's focus on the Nielsen ratings meaningless.

If this article had focused on the declining influence of television as a news source, that would be fine. Instead, Newsmax engages in propaganda by exaggerating the importance a small part of the information with the intent of leading the reader to a false conclusion.

Yeah, yeah, the liberal media do that all the time.... so does that mean we must measure ourselves by their standard?

Conservatives have plenty of pure, unvarnished truth to wield against the leftwing government that just took power.

We can make our case without resorting to propaganda techniques, can't we? If we can't, aren't we just admitting the weakness of our case?

What media bias?

New York Magazine's Gabriel Sherman reports that attendees at the New York Times' inauguration party Tuesday night were instructed to wear a pin bearing the image shown here.

The Times attempted to rationalize the celebration. It surely seems to be splitting hairs to wave off all objections by saying, "Hey, this was organized by the marketing department, not the newsroom."

Sherman comes up with a few rationalizations of his own, including the suggestion that the Times is celebrating because Obama will be good for the economy, and a good economy will be better for the Times' circulation numbers. See? It's nothing political. Obama's just good for business.

No.

The public will look at this image and see in it a confirmation of what they've always known to be true about the Times. Their man is in office now, and it's time to celebrate.


Via: Power Line