IT’S ABOUT TIME. John Kerry finally gives up on Syria’s Bashar al-Assad as a reformer. “He obviously is not a reformer now,” the senator said.

Assad wasn’t a reformer earlier, either, and that was obvious to at least some of us all along.

Meanwhile, Jennifer Rubin reports that Marco Rubio intends to introduce a resolution in the Senate supporting the people of Syria against their dictator. We shouldn’t expect democracy there any time soon, but anything that hurts Assad, even if only slightly, beats doing business with him.

BUT DOES HE DRINK DOS EQUIS? Rand Paul, “The Most Interesting Man in the Senate.”

THE CAMPUS-CARRY MOVEMENT: Alex Hannaford’s Atlantic article is written much-too-much for the magazine’s bobo audience (i.e. people like me); I’m not wild about it.  It’s transparently condescending, for example, to express grave wonderment that anyone could think that Barack Obama is on the side of gun-controllers – look at all the gun-rights laws he’s passed!! – rather than looking at what he tells those to whom he unburdens his soul about bitter clingers, etc.  It strikes me as at least possible that Jerry Brown has actually changed his minds about guns, at least when it comes to him owning them; Barack Obama, naw.

As to campus-carry, however, I myself am torn.  Beloved Daughter is about to go off to college in Texas, as I mentioned, and she is interested in firearms training.  I am a strong supporter of gun rights – and also think that urban kids like my daughter, who has shot a gun once in her life at age 12 in God’s Own Country (that’s the Owens Valley to the rest of you) and does not come from gun culture, needs a lot of real, honest to goodness training in safety and shooting and how one behaves in situations of self-defence with guns.  That’s a lot more than some on-line gun course, and here’s your license.  I want her to be able to carry – but I want her knowledge and training to be real.

And that’s true for the rest of the campus community.  I understand fully the way in which permits and training requirements are manipulated to be a backdoor route to gun control; I also wouldn’t want my kid carrying a gun unless she had a whole lot of it, and updated on a regular basis.  I want her to come back from school not just owning a handgun as a toy, but competent to use it. (Thanks to reader DM for the recommendation on a training course in our area.)

DID YOU KNOW MITCH DANIELS’S WIFE left him and their 4 children, married another man, then came back and remarried Mitch? Is he reluctant to declare his candidacy because he doesn’t want to have to explain that? Come on! Frame it as a pretty story, and run with it.

BASICALLY COMPLETE? “Obama Finally Visits U.S.-Mexico Border,” Katie Pavlich writes at Townhall:

President Obama said the fence was now “basically complete.” This declaration is completely false. The fence along the southern border in total equals 670 miles. The entire southern border is 2000 miles long, which is nowhere near, “basically complete.” On top of a meager border fence, the February 2011, Government Accountability Office report shows “1120 southwest border miles have not yet achieved operational control.” Also, according to Sheriffs working and living on the U.S.-Mexico border, Obama’s assertion that his administration has done it’s part to enforce the border is laughable.

Well, over the past two years we have answered those concerns.  Under Secretary Napolitano’s leadership, we have strengthened border security beyond what many believed was possible.   They wanted more agents on the border. Well, we now have more boots on the ground on the southwest border than at any time in our history.  The Border Patrol has 20,000 agents – more than twice as many as there were in 2004, a build up that began under President Bush and that we have continued.

They wanted a fence. Well, that fence is now basically complete.

So, we have gone above and beyond what was requested by the very Republicans who said they supported broader reform as long as we got serious about enforcement.

Obama took credit for confiscating 64 percent more weapons than ever before. Well, that’s what happens when the federal government sends thousands of guns into Mexico in the first place through Operation Fast and Furious under the Obama Justice Department and ATF, of course it becomes easier to confiscate more guns when you put more into an area to begin with.

“On another note, Obama asked the audience if he needed to build a moat on the border to make republicans happy. There is already a moat on the border Mr. President, it’s called the Rio Grande.”

“NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE RELIES UPON FAKED RESEARCH TO SMEAR MILITARY:” At Commentary, Jonathan S. Tobin writes:

Entitled “A Beast in the Heart of Every Fighting Man,” Luke Mogelson’s story described the murder of an Afghan elder in Kandahar province as well as two other civilians by five members of one army platoon. Since the news had already been reported elsewhere, Mogelson had a broader point to make. As his title made clear, he saw the activities of one small group of soldiers led by a sociopathic sergeant as representative of the U.S. military—not only the spirit of the American effort in Afghanistan, but the governing ethos of the U.S. military as a whole. Although the number of U.S. war crimes has been relatively small, Mogelson believes it is wrong to view them as exceptional. The fault is not so much “the exceptional few” who commit atrocities, but the “institutional failures” of the military and the nature of the wars that we are fighting. To buttress this assertion he claims:

Over the course of military history, American soldiers have become increasingly willing to kill. In World War II, just 15–20 percent of infantrymen fired their rifles at the enemy during battles; in Korea that number increased to 55 percent; in Vietnam it reached 90.

The source of these statistics was General S. L. A. Marshall, a military historian who included it in his 1947 book Men Against Fire. Mogelson pulled them from a more recent book by retired military psychiatrist Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, whom Mogelson quotes as accusing the military of “programming” soldiers to kill indiscriminately.

But what Mogelson fails to disclose in his article is that, more than 20 years ago, the New York Times itself published an article debunking the numbers upon which his entire argument rests.

Read the whole thing.

UPDATE: A reader emails:

I have read some of Col. Grossman’s books and have taken a course from him in person.  He would never accuse “the military of “programming” soldiers to kill indiscriminately.”  Now I can believe someone could take some of what Col. Grossman has writtten and by taking his words out of context twist it so it seems he is saying the opposite from what he really is saying.  Col. Grossman admires the men and women of our military and law enforcement.

UPDATE: Related thoughts from Bryan Preston at the Tatler.

ACE OF SPADES SHRUGS: Ace reviews Atlas Shrugged:

I went in with low expectations, partly because of the critics’ savaging (even though I know not to trust them, you can’t help incorporate spin if you hear it enough) but mostly because I read the book, and knew, to make a good movie out of it, you’d have to change a lot. And I feared that they wouldn’t.

That said, I was pretty nicely surprised. It’s good. Not great. But still — good. It’s actually more subtle than I was expecting; maybe too subtle in one key area (more on this later, as it truly is key). Rand’s book had the subtlety of a cast-iron lightning bolt, so any screen treatment might be expected to be much less didactic than her novel; but they seemed to have gone even further in toning down the heavy didacticism. Oh, it pops up here and there, but it’s not really objectionable.

In fact, to tell the truth, I could have endured a little more of the statement of principle stuff. Because with so much of that stripped away– why are the heroes acting as they do?

Two and a half stars good (which is my way of saying “Good enough to see, but not outstanding;” outstanding is three stars and superlative is four).

That’s not too far off the mark from my own take immediately after seeing Atlas: made-for-TV-quality production values and acting damaged a film that’s brimming with big, and timely ideas. It wasn’t as nearly as bad as I expected, but it was far from good enough to get the job done. And given that this sort of film in particular needs quality word of mouth to sustain it at the box office, and move it beyond an audience made up of libertarians and hardcore Objectivists, that B-Movie vibe couldn’t have helped. But if it’s still playing near you, see it for yourself and decide.

But will there be a sequel or two?

BUDGET TRAVEL TOOLS for students going abroad for summer school: Budgeting is hard for students anyway, and more so when out of familiar currencies, prices, patterns of spending, and limits on how much money you have.  (Do you think of your kid as Mlle. Moral Hazard or Mr. Too-Beloved-To-Fail?)

WITH DNC IN MIND, CITY BANS CARRYING URINE, FECES:

• “Steelworkers Official Facing Charges of Threats and Feces Throwing”

• “The Nanny State In Your Diaper”

• “He might have seriously mistaken the cockpit for the bathroom. He’s only been on three planes in his whole life.”

(H/T to James Taranto for the headline, which originated here.)

SAN FRANCISCO IS OLD GAY. The new gay is: Minneapolis!

CROWDFUNDING:

Shut out by belt-tightening venture capitalists and dwindling grant programs, thousands of entrepreneurs and artists are turning to a new way of raising money that doesn’t depend on who you know.

In fact, it’s what you do — or plan to do — that can make or break success in the world of “crowdfunding,” which allows anyone to raise money with online video and blog pitches. Through sites like Kickstarter.com and Indiegogo.com, the top crowdfunding conduits in the U.S., donors big and small can contribute to projects that catch their eye.

“At a time when it’s very challenging to get money, it democratizes the process,” said Tory Johnson, 40, a small-business expert and founder of Spark & Hustle. “People you don’t even know will give you money.”

Johnson says crowdfunding is an essential tool that she teaches in a series of regional conferences for female entrepreneurs, which is coming to Woburn on Thursday.

Why, it’s like an Army of Davids or something.

NERDIEST correction ever.  I dated a medievalist in college, who frequently commented that I looked like an elf.  When I protested that at 6’2, I was hardly elf material, he looked at me with weary contempt.  “Real elves,” he told me, “are tall.”

DISPATCHES FROM THE ANCIEN RÈGIME: Tony Kushner meets the Rosenbergs.

LEAN FORWARD: MSNBC host Martin Bashir to former Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO): “To follow your logic, would you have then preferred the death of the president as opposed to bin Laden?”

Video at Real Clear Politics.

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ROBOTICS AND AUTOMATION kicks off in Shanghai, and New Scientist is on the case with previews. “While the hot topic at ICRA will be the critical role that robots are currently playing the other side of the East China Sea – exploring and clearing the wrecked reactor buildings at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan – the convention will see details on a fascinating crop of robots revealed, from levitating medical camera bots to droids that can burrow underground on Mars.”

BEN, I WANT TO SAY ONE WORD TO YOU. JUST ONE WORD: Plastics Spending.

WHEN HISTORY RHYMES: President Bush was pummeled by the left for his Katrina flyover moment in 2005; as Arianna Huffington wrote at the time:

The president’s 35-minute Air Force One flyover of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama was the perfect metaphor for his entire presidency: detached, disconnected, and disengaged. Preferring to take in America’s suffering — whether caused by the war in Iraq or Hurricane Katrina — from a distance. In this case, 2,500 feet.

Flash-forward to 2011 — veteran White House reporter Keith Koffler asks the current president, “What? Not Even a Look Out the Window?”

President Obama doesn’t seem to have even peered out his Air Force One window to view the swelling Mississippi, a minimal show of interest for which George W. Bush was pilloried when he took a peak at the damage wrought by Hurricane Katrina in 2005. At least Bush bothered to look.

Obama is traveling today OVER the devastation being wrought by the Mississippi in order to get to events in Texas, where he will rally his Hispanic supporters with a speech on immigration in El Paso and then head to the Lone Star state’s liberal bastion of Austin for two fundraisers.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, who spoke with reporters aboard Air Force One, was asked whether Obama had bothered to get a view from above.

“I haven’t seen him do that but I haven’t been with him for the full flight so far,” Carney said.

Well, it certainly doesn’t sound like they were on the lookout for it, and it’s clear the plane is not intentionally headed over a particularly devastated area for a look-see.

Obama’s hopscotch over the Mississippi flooding is emblematic of his disaster no-show policy.

Fortunately, digging a nice, deep rhetorical moat should help the flood waters recede, if willing them back doesn’t work.

DO COMMON ANTI-ANXIETY DRUGS REDUCE REACTIONS TO UNFAIRNESS?: “In the present study, the subjects were either given the anti-anxiety tranquilliser Oxazepam or a sugar pill (placebo) while playing the Ultimate Game. The researchers found that those who had received the drug showed lower amygdala activity and a stronger tendency to accept an unfair distribution of the money – this despite the fact that when asked, they still considered the suggestion unfair.”

INSTAVISION, FROM THE NRA CONVENTION: “Say Uncle: Chance Ballew on the Role of New Media at the NRA:”

SayUncle’s Chance Ballew talks with Glenn Reynolds at the NRA Convention about the role of new media in promoting gun rights and why Pittsburgh ninjas are no match for gun loving Americans.

“The gun rights people are very active as long as they have a place to get the information.” — SayUncle’s Chance Ballew

Approximately three minutes; click here or on the screen capture below to watch:

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION FOR ME, BUT NOT FOR THEE: In his latest “Best of the Web” column, James Taranto notes that AP is trying to have it both ways when it comes to the photos of Osama bin Laden’s death:

This column has no strong opinion on the question of whether the government should release photos of Osama bin Laden’s dead body. We’re with Peggy Noonan in finding President Obama’s “we don’t spike the football” comment obnoxious and wrongheaded, but we can well imagine that legitimate reasons of taste or national security militate against the release.

The Atlantic reports that Associated Press has filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the photos. “This information is important for the historical record,” Michael Oreskes, the AP’s senior managing editor, tells the magazine:

The organization’s FOIA request included a reminder of the president’s campaign pledge and a plea to be more transparent than his predecessor. “The Obama White House ‘pledged to be the most transparent government in U.S. history,” wrote the AP, “and to comply much more closely with the Freedom of Information Act than the Bush administration did.’ ” . . .

A journalist’s prerogative is to ask questions and find answers, said Oreskes. “It’s our job as journalists to seek this material.”

“We’re not deciding in advance to publish this material,” he pledged. “We would like our journalists, who are working very hard, to see this material and then we’ll decide what’s publishable and what’s not publishable based on the possibly that it’s inflammatory.”

Oreskes is trying to have it both ways, isn’t he? Like the government, he is willing in principle to withhold the photos from the public. He faults the government only for withholding them from journalists. “We’ll decide,” he says. But what gives the AP that right? Who elected Michael Oreskes?

To be sure, part of the job of a journalist is to decide when not to publish information, and this sometimes entails making judgments about what is in the public interest. In this case, however, the AP is demanding specific information on the ground that the public has a right to know it. If the public really has a right to see the photos, the AP has no more business withholding them than the government does.

Hey, nobody said it was easy designating yourself as The Deciders.

UK ADVOCACY GROUP PROPOSES TO SUE PREDATOR DRONE OPERATORS: Robert Chesney at Lawfare describes the UK group Reprieve’s plans to sue drone operators in a campaign of public advocacy.  As with most of these advocacy campaigns, the point is not to win cases, but to create a public narrative that says the practice is unsavory and illegitimate, and leverage that into personal legal uncertainty for officials, whether in office or once they leave government.  I sound like a broken record on this, but the US government has a remarkable record of allowing others to set the narratives and then discovering that even the US government can get trapped by them.  Drone strikes are the thin tactical tip of certain forms of conflict, particularly in intelligence-driven uses of force, and they will be President Obama’s signature contribution to the art of war.  They are vastly more discriminating than other technologies and sparing of civilians, and it would be a terrible thing if they were derailed because the CIA, DOD, DOS, and the rest of the US government failed to develop its own public narrative.

STOP THE WORLD, I WANT TO GET OFF:

“Liberals in southern Arizona seek to form new state” — Reuters.

“I’ll be busy for the next week or so on a shoot. The job’s in Texas, which naturally made me think of an old post of mine called Dear Texas, which half-jokingly attempts to persuade Texas to secede from the Union so we can have a place of freedom to flee to once Obama, Soros, and the like take over the country completely and turn it into their utopian nightmare.”  — Conservative campaign ad and viral video producer Ladd Ehlinger Jr.

And just because: “MILF drops secession plan on Malaysia’s advice” — GMA News.

‎

THE RISE AND FALL OF DONALD TRUMP’S PRESIDENTIAL BID? “Donald Trump has had one of the quickest rises and falls in the history of Presidential politics. Last month we found him leading the Republican field with 26%. In the space of just four weeks he’s dropped all the way down to 8%, putting him in a tie for fifth place with Ron Paul.”

In contrast to the hucksterish Trump, say what you will about Mitch Daniels, it’s tough to fault a presidential candidate who lists Virginia Postrel as one of his favorite authors.

And Herman Cain fans declare “Start the War From Right Here.”

MICHAEL YON: THE DEATH OF OSAMA BIN LADEN: INITIAL GLOBAL MEDIA REACTION, a detailed PDF report.

And if you missed it last week, check out “The European Media Reacts to Death of Osama Bin Laden” from Soeren Kern.

DISPATCHES FROM THE INNER PARTY: ‘Yes,’ said O’Brien, ‘we can turn it off. We have that privilege.'”

The Proles, and members of the Outer Party aren’t nearly as fortunate.