CHANGE: Dems To Vote Against Debt-Limit Hike? “Will the White House scold Barney Frank for being ‘deeply irresponsible’? . . . The White House will look impotent indeed if it can’t round up a considerable majority in its own party’s caucus to support a measure they claim is direly needed to stave off economic disaster, especially if that argument is actually true.”

A SCIENTIFIC SPLIT ON the anti-aging value of resveratrol.

THE PRESS AS obituary writers.

TIM PAWLENTY DEMONSTRATES THAT HE’S NOT MAN ENOUGH TO BE PRESIDENT. Well, that was quick. These are the times that try men’s souls. Sometimes, they’re found wanting.

UPDATE: So Politico has updated its story and here’s the key bit:

“It would not have been my style,” Pawlenty said Tuesday on “Good Morning America,” referring to a map like the one posted last year on the Sarah PAC website showing crosshairs on the district of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and other Democratic lawmakers who supported health care reform.

He was quick to add that he sees no link between Palin’s imagery and the shootings Saturday in Tucson that claimed six lives and critically injured Giffords.

Asked later in the morning on ABC’s “The View” if he thought the Tucson incident would mark the end of Palin’s political career, the former governor replied, “No, no, I don’t.”

“You can debate tactics and style,” he said, “but there’s no evidence that she or anyone else is at fault” for inspiring the alleged shooter, Jared Lee Loughner.

“We have a mentally unstable, deranged individual,” Pawlenty said. “We know that sometimes they do senseless and irrational things. And to condemn or to judge based on those facts as we know them today is unfair.”

And here’s my problem. “It would not have been my style.”

Really? If some Web guy had done that map, Tim Pawlenty would have looked at it and said, pre-Tucson, “Oh noes, those look like crosshairs! Take them off!” Tim Pawlenty may say he would have done that, and for all I know may even think he would have done that. But to me, agreeing with Stephen Green, above, it looks like an instinct to separate himself from controversy, and ingratiate himself with the interviewer, that speaks poorly.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Pawlenty followup here. Also, more from Stephen Green:

I’m no Palin partisan. Far from it. In fact — and here I go starting trouble again — although I like her, there’s not much chance I would vote for Sarah in any primary. So I’m not tempted to scratch off Pawlenty because he supposedly dissed Palin. It’s clear to me that he did no such thing.

My problem with Pawlenty’s statement is twofold: It’s weak tea (no pun intended) and this is the exact wrong time to make even the smallest concession to the lefty narrative. By weak tea, I mean: Pawlenty didn’t say much at all, and I’d rather have a stand up guy sitting at the Resolute desk. As to his concession, it was tiny but it was there: Words, symbols even, can be bad naughty evil things that make otherwise nice boys shoot at congressmen.

No.

We fight the Left on this and we fight it hard.

And Pawlenty didn’t, says Stephen. That’s how it looks to me, too. Andrew Sullivan thinks this is about “subcultures.” I think it’s about submission to a media meme. Not what we need now, and ironic in a guy with a book out about having the courage to stand up.

MORE: Courage To Sit: “He had, of course, a different agenda, and the last thing he wanted to do in these appearances was talk about Sarah Palin. But he should have anticipated that topic number one would be Tucson, and that if he wants to be held in high regard by the party’s base, he should take advantage of the opportunity to be a hero by standing up to the pathetically weak left-wing narrative. That he didn’t do so, strongly enough to be perceived as doing so by conservatives, is unfortunate, to say the least. We are in a moment in time where most Americans are ready to turn away from the Democrats’ ghoulish opportunism in revulsion, and Pawlenty played it much too safe.”

EUGENE VOLOKH ON The First Amendment and Speech That Allegedly Threatens Public Officials.

LETTING THE CRAZIES SET POLICY: Rep. Peter King to introduce bill making it illegal to carry a gun within 1,000 feet of ‘high-profile’ government official. Not smart. If the House GOP passes hysterical, dumb gun laws, they can look forward to more primary challenges in 2012. Show a little backbone, Pete. Speaker Boehner did.

UPDATE: A sensible reply: “I’d like to see legislation banning Congress from coming within 1,000 feet of my paycheck.”

CHANGE: Rahm Emanuel Tells Chicago Unions Bosses That Pensions Have To Be Cut.

SCIENCE: “Most women still prefer to marry a man who earns more money than they do and would stay at home with their children if they could afford it, according to a survey published yesterday.”

In the interest of equality, we must make sure that these dreams are impossible to fulfill.

MORE HOPE AND CHANGE: Wage Cuts Steepest Since Depression. This is why they’d rather talk about Sarah Palin.

GEORGE LEEF: Law Schools Imitate Enron. “I wonder how long it will be before some aggressive member of the trial bar finds an underemployed law grad to serve as plaintiff in a suit against one of the schools that fudge their numbers. That looks like fraud; it’s no different than a homeowner hiding the fact that his basement leaks from a purchaser.”

I don’t really agree that the second and third years of law school are useless, though lots of people think that law school could be two years instead of three. I certainly knew a lot more when I worked as a summer associate my second summer than I did my first. But this higher education bubble stuff is getting more attention.

And hey, maybe students can expect a government bailout. Some obviously already do.

IN THE NEW YORK TIMES, a guest piece on “civility” from a Democrat who called for Republican candidate Rick Scott to be put up against a wall and shot. Plus, a Krugman connection.

MICHAEL TOTTEN: The Israeli Way of War. If you like his work, consider hitting the tipjar.

GRAND ROUNDS IS UP!

IN THE MAIL: The Network Is Your Customer: Five Strategies to Thrive in a Digital Age.

TRYING OUT A NEW NARRATIVE: Media Pivots To Blame Gun Laws, Sloppy Reporting, Punditry Ensues.

OH NOES! National Journal cover story, features, include violent rhetoric!

When will National Journal’s call to violence ever stop?! From Major Garrett’s front-page story: “Seeing Red: John Boehner’s troops are spoiling for a fight, but the speaker wants to aim before he shoots.” And another heading on the cover: “Coming salvos against the Fed.” Meanwhile in the table of contents are the following headlines: “The lesser evil,” “Two-front war,” and “Hostile takeover.” (I exclude “The War of Law” just because it’s a story about an actual war.)

The issue, which was likely assembled before the mass shooting in Tucson, Ariz., on Saturday, also features an item that describes the tax cut deal as “[t]he last big fight of the last Congress was the tax-cut deal.” And then describes spending and debt as “the first real shootout of this one…” (p. 6).

The idea that these words would somehow set off an unbalanced mind is ludicrous, so much so that it obviously never occurred to the editors of National Journal.

Obviously, they’re murderous wingnuts.

PEJMAN YOUSEFZADEH: Paul Krugman and Armed Democrats. “Notice that he goes beyond maps with targets, and actually shoots a gun after criticizing his Republican incumbent opponent.”

CHANGE: Pennsylvania Voters Develop A Taste For The Tea Party. “The fact that young people think favorably of the Tea Party stands out, Brauer said, and could help shape the Republican and Democratic parties.” This also explains why some people have become so desperate to smear it.

“THE BIG DEFICIT ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM:” Is 2011 The Beginning Of The End For Medicare?

JUST FOR JEFF DANZIGER: Acid Rhetoric Flashbacks.

AT AMAZON, markdowns on household supplies.

A CIVIL RIGHTS OFFICIAL disgraces himself.

PAUL KRUGMAN’S totalitarian temptation.

SO IS THIS THE HOPE, OR THE CHANGE? Downturn’s Ugly Trademark: Steep, Lasting Drop in Wages.

PUNCHING BACK TWICE AS HARD: Talk Radio Hosts: We won’t back down.