Archive for 2011

THE HILL: Dems Grapple With Wu Sex Scandal. “Democrats are grappling with a new ethics scandal surrounding allegations that Rep. David Wu (D-Ore.) sexually assaulted a young woman. The explosive claims are damning for the party, which was beginning to recover from the tarnished wake former Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) left when he resigned last month, after initially denying that he sent sexually suggestive pictures of himself to young women over social-media platforms. . . . Sources close to Wu have said that he is not planning on seeking reelection next year, but Wu gave no indication Monday that he would resign. Several television news channel crews were seen in lawn chairs outside of his third-floor Rayburn office.”

Related: Roll Call: Weird Wu Moments.

L.A. TIMES: New polls confirm Obama’s Democratic base crumbles. “Strong support among liberal Democrats for Obama’s jobs record has plummeted 22 points from 53% down below a third. African Americans who believe the president’s measures helped the economy has plunged from 77% to barely half.”

UPDATE: Reader Michael Costello writes on last night’s Obama speech: “Last night, Barack Obama asked Americans to contact their congressman and give an opinion about how the debt ceiling crisis should be solved. I took his advice and tried to contact my representative and both senators. It took hours because the traffic was so high. But today, I’m reading nothing about how the volume of traffic or in which direction the opinions swayed. I’m inferring from that silence that things didn’t go Obama’s way.’

THE MIRAGE OF LAWYER DISCIPLINE: “The bottom line is that under the current setup, once you get your ticket of admission into the bar by graduating from an accredited law school and passing a bar exam you get a lifetime monopoly of purveying legal information with little scrutiny. Even if the Iowa proposal to trade transparency for speed can be defended by necessity, this necessity is itself created by the inherent inadequacy of state supervision of lawyers. There is a better way.”

POLL: More Americans unhappy with Obama on economy, jobs. “More than a third of Americans now believe that President Obama’s policies are hurting the economy, and confidence in his ability to create jobs is sharply eroding among his base, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. But Americans’ discontent does not stop there. The survey also found that Americans harbor negative feelings toward congressional Republicans.”

The country’s in the very best of hands. Plus this: “The poll showed support for Obama’s economic agenda has begun to slip in the past nine months. The percentage of people who said Obama has made the economy worse jumped six points since October to 37 percent. That creates a bigger opening for Republican attacks as the presidential campaign begins to heat up.”

OBAMA WILL PROBABLY TRY TO TAKE CREDIT: Drug Prices To Plummet In Wave Of Expiring Patents.

The cost of prescription medicines used by millions of people every day is about to plummet.

The next 14 months will bring generic versions of seven of the world’s 20 best-selling drugs, including the top two: cholesterol fighter Lipitor and blood thinner Plavix.

The magnitude of this wave of expiring drugs patents is unprecedented. Between now and 2016, blockbusters with about $255 billion in global annual sales will go off patent, notes EvaluatePharma Ltd., a London research firm. Generic competition will decimate sales of the brand-name drugs and slash the cost to patients and companies that provide health benefits.

I think they mean “devastate,” not “decimate.” Because “decimate” means reduce by a tenth, and I think it’ll do more than that. Meanwhile, the downside is that pharma companies will have a lot less research money.

OBAMA’S SPEECH: “BABY TALK.” “Consider the condescension implicit in the president’s statement—’a term that most people outside of Washington have probably never heard of before.’ These ‘people outside of Washington’ are not little children being lectured on an obscure subject by a worldly adult. These people outside Washington are … citizens. Judging by the polls, most of us have opinions about whether, and under what conditions, the debt ceiling should be raised. We don’t seem to be as ignorant as Obama thinks we are of the term or concept of a debt ceiling. But the president assumes we’ve never bothered our pretty little heads about such a thing.”

UPDATE: Peter Roff: Obama Shameless As Debt Crisis Looms.

But Rand Simberg finds something in the speech to praise:

He called the country the “greatest nation on earth.” Twice, I think.

Does this mean the apology tours are over?

We can hope.

MORE: Ann Althouse analyzes the speeches: “I’d say Boehner won.”

But, from the comments:

Obama is rounding the final turn and is whipping his political horse to come across as the Leader Who Wanted to Save the Value of the Dollar.

Something tells me that the dollars inflation is the feature and not the defect to the real Obama. It always has been.

Once you put away the habitual presumption that all of the forces at work in DC want a solution rather than a default, then it becomes clear who wants the default now before the 2012 election he is sure to lose… unless the Crisis of all Crises in engulfing the country and he can pin it on Congress.

Given his actions of the last couple of years, this’ll be a hard storyline to sell even with media support. But yeah, that doesn’t mean it isn’t the plan.

MORE STILL: A reader emails:

In his speech tonight, President Obama made sure to mention that President Reagan raised the debt ceiling 18 times during his presidency. By my math, that’s more than once every six months while he was in office. And yet, now it’s dangerous to only extend the debt ceiling for 6 months. Can someone get President Obama to explain what’s changed?

Self-interest.

CHANGE: Dollar Falls To All-Time Low Against Swiss Franc, While Gold Hits Record High. “While investors expect a last-minute deal, there is concern that the US faces the loss of its triple A rating. Standard & Poor’s has warned that the US must make a serious effort at reducing its long-term deficits to retain that status.” That almost makes it sound like we’d be better off lowering the debt ceiling, and spending along with it . . . . .

IRA STOLL: Boehner Was Better:

President Obama, in his televised talk tonight, trotted out the same false choices he provided in his USA Today oped. The same objections apply. He draped himself in Reagan, as I predicted in my column last week. He was more pointed and aggressive than he’s been in some other recent appearances in aiming at the ‘wealthiest,’ a term he used four times in a short speech. His delivery, particularly early on, was awkward, with almost a deer-in-the-headlights uncomfortable look. . . .

Speaker Boehner, by contrast, was a refreshing surprise, much better than expected. He got off some excellent lines. My favorite was this: “The president has often said we need a ‘balanced’ approach — which in Washington means: we spend more. . .you pay more…..the president wanted a blank check six months ago, and he wants a blank check today. ” He went on, “right now, we have a government so big and so expensive it’s sapping the drive of our people…There is no symptom of big government more menacing than our debt. Break its grip, and we begin to liberate our economy and our future.”

Where it all goes from here is anyone’s guess, but my bet is that it will be some time before Mr. Obama agrees to go on television in prime time if he knows the Republicans are going to have a chance to reply afterward in the same prime time.

Well, stay tuned.

UPDATE: Reader Rosie Moore emails: “OK, Glenn, I’m obviously too engaged in this debt debate but Boehner said just what I wanted to hear. I’ll now take the dog out for a walk whistling a nice Springsteen melody – No Surrender. Sappy, yes, but I’m optimistic our reps will call Obama’s rhetorical bluff.”

ANOTHER UPDATE: Another reader emails: “I tried to write Boehner and congratulate him for a great response to the President’s speech tonight by using his website’s ‘contact’ link. But the page locked and then I eventually got a message stating ‘Server Too Busy’. I wonder if the server is getting too many other congrats and kudos from many concerned citizens like me. I hope so. He did a fine job, tonight.”

TONY KATZ ON OBAMA’S TALK: “This didn’t seem like a president who was effective. It looked like a panic-stricken leader who was now hoping the like-minded ideologues across America can place enough pressure on Washington to enact non-sensical tax increases. . . . The president was elected to make hard decisions, yet he is unwilling to make any decision. He is supposed to be a great speaker, but has proven he is a horrible listener. And now, he has gone from speaking to begging….begging America to do what he wants, rather than accepting the idea of ‘compromise’ himself.”

Related: Obama Blames Bush, Offers Nothing New. Out of his depth?

Here’s the transcript.

IF WOMEN WERE SUDDENLY HIRING PROSTITUTES IN GREATER NUMBERS, IT WOULD BE A SIGN THAT SOMETHING WAS WRONG WITH MEN. And if men hire prostitutes in greater numbers, it’s a sign that . . . something’s wrong with men. The storyline is certainly consistent. . . .

UPDATE: A reader emails:

First off, Glenn, please don’t give my name out on your site. I don’t need the world to know my sex life.

Having said that, there was a period of my life–about fifteen years back–when I frequently paid prostitutes. Based not only on my own experiences, but on the experiences of other men I’ve met who have done the same, I can tell you flat out this article is crap. It claims to be interested in finding out about johns, but after a few misleading statistics meant to imply that all johns are basically rapists, goes back to the standard talk about how bad prostitutes have it.

Well, of course prostitutes have it bad. If 99% of johns are nonviolent, and she sees five clients a day, then she’ll have a violent client once every three weeks on average. This doesn’t say much about johns; mostly it’s an unintended lesson in the law of averages.

So, what are johns really like? Brace yourself: most of them are unattractive men who are having a hard time getting laid. I’m a lifelong bachelor, but I’m pretty sure this is true for married johns as well: just because you’re married doesn’t mean your wife will have sex with you. Also, in many cases, the wife in question isn’t very attractive, simply because the unattractive husband had to take what he could get; I’m not defending adultery, but in many cases, the john is probably seriously repulsed by his wife.

I guess “johns are homicidal rapists” gets more readers than “johns are ugly nerds.”

Indeed. Meanwhile, another reader, who also asks anonymity, writes:

They are.

http://www.eros-lasvegas.com/classifieds/erosfemale.htm

as of today there are 251 ladies advertising their services of which 144 are offering services to other women. It’s no longer the old ‘men exploiting women’ narrative.

Oh, the narrative won’t change, just because the facts do. Exit question: Are “Janes” ugly female nerds?

ANOTHER UPDATE: A reader emails: “Can we PLEASE stop calling them ‘Johns?'” Guess what his first name is . . . .