INTERVIEW: Ed Driscoll talks to Zev Chafets about Chafets’ new book, Roger Ailes: Off Camera.

HOW DO YOU DECIDE when someone is “elderly?” It’s another case of a euphemism becoming an insult.

REVOLUTIONIZING RAZORS: A New Business Could Change The Way Men Shave.

But the Dollar Shave Club has better videos.

THE OTHER MARRIAGE INEQUALITY: My USA Today column for today is up.

SOCIAL NETWORKS promote the spread of good news.

RICHARD EPSTEIN: The End of Innovation? “A new and unnecessary law restructures the U.S. patent system for the worse.”

BILL WHITTLE: Afterburner: Making It Hurt.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Not So Happy About Cyprus.

Russia’s well-connected kleptocrats have the most to lose here, and it’s not surprising that they called their friends in the Kremlin at the first sound of this story breaking. It’s just not going to help them much in this case: Putin and his cohorts can wail and gnash their teeth all day long, but unless the Russian government is willing to pony up and pay to bail the depositors, the Kremlin has precious little leverage over this decision.

There’s also a chance that the tax will be revised further in ways Russia will hate even more. The Cypriot central bank governor is arguing that small savers should be exempted from the tax in accordance with EU-wide deposit insurance rules, which guarantee accounts under €100,000. That would likely mean an even bigger tax on the big fish. If this were to happen, expect more outrage from Moscow—again probably to no effect.

The troubles of Cyprus and Greece offered Russia a once in a generation opportunity to build its influence in the EU. These two countries are close to Russia in culture and religion, and Russia is broadly popular in both. Like Russia, they are worried about Turkey. Like Russia, they are deeply suspicious of the liberal West. A close alliance with these countries would give Moscow much greater leverage over the EU, and many in the EU would be prepared to accept that role—if Russia would bear the brunt of Greek and Cypriot debt problems.

Russia has made very little use of this opportunity, and the reason appears to be Russia’s economic weakness.

Take note.

UPDATE: Next, New Zealand? Just more reason for the GOP to offer anti-confiscation legislation now.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Eugene Volokh says that despite the headline, this isn’t really Cyprus-in-New-Zealand:

I might well be mistaken, and this is far outside my field, but is the New Zealand proposal that similar to the Cyprus one? As I understand it from the story, the New Zealand proposal is essentially a suggestion to abolish deposit insurance going forward — a proposal that would fit in the “crunchy” category endorsed by http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/4529b44e-68b8-11da-bd30-0000779e2340,dwp_uuid=6f876a3c-e19f-11da-bf4c-0000779e2340.html#axzz2NoPXcDDk (“Soggy federal deposit insurance, coupled with the move towards a soggier interest-rate regime, has taken many of America’s thrifts and banks into the shadow of a systemic collapse.”), and that would require depositors to scrutinize bank accounts just as they do other investments, whether themselves or through intermediaries. That might not be a good idea; perhaps on balance deposit insurance is good, despite the moral hazard it creates. But it’s quite different from Cyprus, where the government is being pressured to renege on its existing insurance guarantees. Or am I missing something?

Good point. True, it differs from Cyprus’ approach in that it’s not retroactive. Offering only partial deposit insurance upfront encourages depositors to choose their banks carefully since, in reality, when you make a deposit in a bank, what you’re really doing is making a loan to the bank. Such an approach is, however, a two-edged sword since while it may encourage more policing of banks by depositors on the front end, once there’s doubt it makes a bank run more likely than full deposit insurance.

RETRO MARRIAGE: One Reason Women Stay Home: Because It’s Easier on Everyone.

TEN YEARS ON, soldier recalls Iraq invasion. “I would absolutely do it again.”

Related: Southie vet: ‘I would do it all over again tomorrow.’

It’s nice to hear that from the people who served. I think the Bush Administration dropped the ball on Arab democracy promotion in 2005, when I believe it would have gone better than the “Arab Spring” turned out. And the Obama Administration, of course, blew the withdrawal. Nonetheless Iraq is freer, and vastly more prosperous, than it was under Saddam and has a decent shot at becoming a successful and democratic nation, which is better than many countries in the region. [Later: What, I’m on the same page with Bill Maher?]

UPDATE: A reader whose name I’m omitting because he’s a serving military officer emails:

As a military analyst, I knew why we went in from the beginning. It was the right thing to do, and the right way to do it (at least the invasion, and the later Surge).

There were some middle parts where we didn’t do a great job working toward our goals, but it wasn’t because the invasion was wrong. It was inability to adapt to an unexpected environment. Petraeus’ COIN strategy was correct, and Bush was correct in approving it.

Obama absolutely fumbled the withdrawal.

That seems about right to me.

AT AMAZON, freshen up with Spring Cleaning Products & Supplies.

Also, today only: ASUS S56CA-WH31 15.6-Inch Ultrabook, $399.99 (43% off).

UPDATE: Okay, the ultrabook sold out fast, but the new deal is a Seagate Backup Plus 4 TB USB 3.0 Desktop External Hard Drive for $139.99. I still can’t believe you can get 4 terabyte drives at all, much less for so little. But then, it is the 21st century, after all . . ..

INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY: First, They Came For The Cypriots… Like I said, an enterprising GOP member of the House or Senate would introduce a bill immediately to make such shenanigans illegal — and dare the Dems to oppose it.

Related: It Begins: Confiscation of Private Funds by Government Desperate for Cash. (Bumped).

UPDATE: Reader Michael Smith writes:

The near juxtaposition of the recent Instapundit links to 401K withdrawals and savings confiscations both real and planned, suggests that such a draw-downs could be in part a form of wealth guarding.

A 401K withdrawal might be encumbered with tax consequences, but they might just be a potentially smart move with the risk of inflated markets, food and energy inflation, supply shocks, and government pokes and grabs. Would it not be better to hold years of food, tradable items, and other durable tools and supplies, or risk losing them to outright confiscation? Purchase and storage of the right things is no longer so obviously paranoid or foolish. That this is not obviously wrong and instead very possibly true prudence is what is so disturbing about today’s political climate.

Can anyone be sure that 401K drainage might not be by the ants now—as well as the grasshoppers? Surely mostly grasshoppers still, but maybe that’s not so foolish either—better to maximize the hedonic value of a life’s savings than simply lose them. Maybe it’s the only optimistic strategy left: We’re all grasshoppers now!

This line of thinking is great in rationalizing the purchase of a portable power generator or inverter. You *can* take it with you!

Well, that’s close to the thesis of Aaron Clarey’s Enjoy The Decline. Short of going the full Clarey, it is prudent to think of places to put your money where it will be harder for the looters to get at: Paying off debt, educating your kids, hard goods that you’ll enjoy, etc. People in third-world kleptocracies tend to buy real estate in stable foreign countries, which is why so many Venezuelans now own condos in Miami. But it’s not clear that this strategy is a winner for Americans.

The real concern is that when you get productive citizens thinking this way, you’re already a step further down the road to a third-world psychology, which is not conducive to economic growth. Which is, I stress again, why enterprising GOP legislators should be pushing a non-confiscation law.

FRUGALITY IS FOR THE LITTLE PEOPLE: White House refuses to promise that Obama will cut back on ‘lavish vacations.’ “Confronted about President Obama’s $1 million golf trip, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney attacked Republicans rather than promise that the president will cut back on ‘lavish vacations’ paid for by taxpayers.”

If I were a Republican in Congress, I’d introduce a bill banning Presidential travel whenever a budget is overdue.

CONSEQUENCES: How Federal Tax Law Killed The Swing Era And Launched BeBop.

WELL, HIS NAME IS “NUTTER:” Philadelphia Mayor Suggests Magazine Article on Race Relations Isn’t Protected by the First Amendment. People are always saying we need to have a national conversation on race, until someone says something they don’t like.

OBAMAVILLES: Gypsy Encampments of the Hollywood Freeway:

On our way to downtown Los Angeles Saturday night for the annual Churchill Dinner of the Claremont Institute at the venerable Biltmore Hotel, my wife Sheryl and I took the Hollywood Freeway, a route we had taken uncountable times before.

Only something was different. Small encampments of homeless had been set up on the edge of the freeway. We were used to them under freeway bridges, but these were more elaborate, makeshift tents and blankets positioned on slopes along the freeway, so that, we speculated, they were in full view of the constant passing traffic. That way the violence frequently visited on the homeless by themselves and by others would at least partly be discouraged.

I was reminded of Victor Hanson’s poignant descriptions of the California Central Valley and also of when I lived in Southern Spain and would see impoverished gypsy encampments along the roads to Grenada and Seville. But that was decades ago and that part of Spain, Andalucia, was desperately poor then, struggling to play catch up with the rest of Europe. It did — for a while anyway.

The Hollywood Freeway was not so simple. This was a parade of the haves and have-nots, Mercedes and Lexuses, streaming past the tattered homeless: Obama’s America.

How’s that hopey-changey stuff workin’ out for ya?

Related: Victor Davis Hanson: Five Days of Hope And Despair. A report from 21st century California.

ROLL CALL: Harry Reid’s Wishful Budget Thinking.

I JUST NOTICED THAT Nina Planck’s Real Food is out in a Kindle edition.

CULTURE OF CORRUPTION: Former CEO Of Calpers Indicted On Financial Fraud Scheme Charges.

MORE OF THE SAME: The Hill: House Dem budget includes $1.2T in taxes, $200B new stimulus.

SCOTT RASMUSSEN: Beware Of The New Elites.

Today, just 35 percent of voters believe the economy is fair to middle-class Americans. Only 41 percent believe it is fair to those who are willing to work hard.

Some politicians, particularly Democrats, are better at acknowledging the importance of fairness, but they have a pretty limited definition of what it means. They complain about income inequality but ignore the larger context.

For most Americans, the context is very important. If a CEO gets a huge paycheck after his company received a government bailout, that’s a problem. People who get rich through corporate welfare schemes are seen as suspect. On the other hand, 86 percent believe it’s fair for people who create very successful companies to get very rich.

In other words, it’s not just the income; it’s whether the reward matched the effort. People don’t think it’s a problem that Steve Jobs got rich. After all, he created Apple Computer and the iPad generation. But there was massive outrage about the bonuses paid to AIG executives after that company was propped up by the federal government.

On a more routine basis, most Americans are offended by the revolving door between Washington and Wall Street. The practice of working for the government to network and then cash in with a firm that needs your government contacts is seen as fair only by those who practice it.

The revolving door hints at the larger problem. The United States is supposed to be a land of opportunity, where everyone can pursue their dreams. Throughout our history, many have started with nothing and risen to the top. But those on top today are busy rewriting the rules to limit entry into their club.

Yes, yes, yes. And my revolving-door surtax is just a small part of the equation. (Emphasis added.)

THANKS TO OBAMACARE, the difference between optometrists and ophthalmologists may be blurring.

CORY DOCTOROW: Copyright Shouldn’t Take Away Real Property Rights.

SCIENCE: The Short-Lived Brilliance of Batter Blaster.

I’m sad, but the Insta-Daughter is pleased.