TAXPROF: The IRS Scandal, Day 559.

RESET-BUTTON UPDATE: “Salami Slicing” and Deterrence.

The second way deterrence can fail is gradual, through a chipping-away at the credibility of the leading power in the system. This is not mutually exclusive of catastrophic failure, in that gradual collapse can degenerate into a large-scale war, with the unforeseeable outcomes such a conflict brings. The difference lies in the fact that one of the parties is intentionally seeking to readjust the status quo undergirded by deterrence by means of a gradual alteration of expectations and credibility. The revisionist side wants to engender a gradual failure of deterrence because it considers the existing geopolitical order not to be attuned to its interests or prestige. But it also does not want to jump into a large conflict with the power or powers that underwrite the status quo because it may be the weaker side, or simply because war is dangerous business. The objective is to alter in a steady and almost stealthy way the expectations of future behavior that keep deterrence alive. That is, the revisionist power wants to make all parties involved—the rival as well as his allies—believe present promises of behavior will not be honored in the future. Once such a belief sets in, the options for the targeted powers are limited to accepting the new geopolitical reality or restoring the status quo ante. In either case, deterrence has failed—not violently, but in the realm of perceptions and expectations.

America’s international rivals today are seeking to cause the failure of U.S. extended deterrence using this latter method. Aware of their weaknesses against the United States and its allies and cognizant of the incalculability of engaging in direct confrontation with the world’s most powerful nation, they are engaged instead in a cautious game of “salami-slicing.” Their strategy is to break deterrence bit by bit, through repeated demonstrations of its insolvency in small, hard-to-counter crises.

The proper response, of course, is to punch back twice as hard, making such efforts disproportionately painful. But — and this is the key — it’s not so much that Obama is weak, as that he just doesn’t care. He has more flexibility to ignore this stuff after the election, and he’s using it.

Related: Putin Targets The Scandinavians. If it were me, I’d give the Poles nukes. Instead, we’re letting the Iranians develop them. . . .

JUSTICE: Lynch’s Attorney General Nomination Slipping to 2015.

AT AMAZON, Kindle Daily Deals.

Plus, Today’s Featured Digital Deal.

And, today only: 25% or more off select Thanksgiving Kitchen Gear.

EBOLA: Remains Of Woman Under Monitoring Who Died Suddenly In New York Being Tested For Ebola.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Cost of College Crosses $260,000 Threshold.

Related: Forget the Rise in Tuition and Fees, What About Living Expenses? Yeah, they gouge you even more on those.

CULTURE OF CORRUPTION: Gruber’s Obamacare payday highlights ulterior motives behind ‘do something’ cry.

For all the cursing of congressional gridlock, one of the greatest sources of Washington’s evils may be the bias in favor of doing something.

As voices chime in from the major media, from K Street, and from party leadership for the new Republican Congress to do something, it’s worth pausing, taking a breath, and looking at the recent problems caused by this urge — and the less-than-noble incentives that sometimes drive it.

The Beltway media’s predominant bias is that, for every issue, Washington politicians should do something. The simplest explanation for this bias: it gives reporters something to write about. Inaction is bad for readership.

Democratic politicians’ uncontrollable urge to do something is tied up with their view of government’s role as the champion of justice, the wise arranger of the economy and shaper of culture.

But there’s a deeper motivation to do something, and the Republican leadership shares it: When government takes a more active role in the economy, it creates private-sector employment opportunities for the policymakers — and for their advisors, like Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber.

Gruber, the MIT professor who won almost $400,000 in contracts from the Obama administration in a non-competitive contract process, came into the spotlight again this month when a new video surfaced in which he admitted that “lack of transparency” was crucial to passing Obamacare.

My colleague Byron York pointed to a more interesting Gruber detail: After the bill passed, Gruber won hundreds of thousands of dollars in contracts with state governments setting up the exchanges under Obamacare.

Gruber, then, had to mislead Americans (or maybe just their senators) in order to pass Obamacare, and that opened a gusher of lucrative contracts for him. There is no doubt that Gruber sincerely thought the country needed health-care reform. But still, his financial interest in the bill ought to have raised some skepticism about the numbers he was peddling.

Nonsense. Only greedy conservatives advocate policies out of greed.

TAXES ARE FOR THE LITTLE PEOPLE: NYT: Al Sharpton’s Influence Grows, Along With His Unpaid Taxes. The big story is that the NYT is reporting on this, though notably it’s doing so after the elections.

ROLL CALL: Will Republicans Need a New Message on Climate Change in 2016? Not if it stays this cold.

Note that Lake Superior wasn’t ice-free until June, and is already icing up again, earlier than normal. Argue about whether that’s weather or climate, if the cold cycle holds, nobody’s going to be getting traction out of global warming.

THE HILL: White House prepares activists for Obama’s immigration order.

The White House held calls with activist groups on Tuesday to prepare them for President Obama’s executive action on immigration, sources tell The Hill. . . .

One source said the White House sought to “temper expectations,” on the executive action, cautioning that while some advocates have pushed for him to carry out the Senate’s immigration reform bill, Obama doesn’t have the legal authority to go as far by acting alone.

“They’re setting expectations, making it clear he has the legal authority to do what he’s going to do, but that he’s not going beyond his authority, as some advocates would like,” said one source familiar with the calls on Tuesday.

The source predicted that, given the timing of the calls, that the White House could announce the executive order as early as Wednesday, but cautioned the president could also wait for the government funding fight in Congress to run its course.

“My guess is whatever they have teed up is already ready,” the source said.

Multiple reports have suggested Obama is poised to dramatically expand his deferred action program, allowing the parents of children who are legal residents or citizens of the United States to avoid deportation proceedings. Obama might also expand the eligibility for the current deferred action program, which allows children who were brought to the United States and remained in violation of the law to remain.

The president is also reportedly poised to expand specialty visas for high-tech workers. In total, an estimated 4 to 5 million illegal immigrants could be eligible for the program.

Stay tuned.

FREE SPEECH UPDATE: Can California ban gun stores from advertising handguns on their signs?

ED DRISCOLL: Earth In The Grubering. “Grubering also helps to define the relatively recent trend on the left not just to lie — that’s always been a component of the left — but to openly admit to lying as an unalloyed good to advance the Noble Cause.”

THE PALACE GUARD MEDIA ARE STILL AT WORK: Major media mostly giving Gruber ‘stupidity’ videos the silent treatment.

Half a dozen videos have exploded online showing Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber calling the American people stupid, but most major media outlets are downplaying the controversy or portraying it as little more than partisan Republican noise.

Only a handful of major news organizations have devoted significant coverage to Gruber’s “stupidity” remark and his other admissions, including his saying the law’s “lack of transparency” was key to its passage by Congress and that the measure was vaguely written so the Congressional Budget Office would not score it as a tax.

The Washington Post and CBS News have published several stories on the Gruber videos, but they have also downplayed his role in writing Obamacare and focused a great deal on the GOP’s response to the controversy in partisan terms.

As a result, the Post’s reporting has included these headlines: “Did Jonathan Gruber earn ‘almost $400,000’ from the Obama administration?” “Obamacare consultant under fire for ‘stupidity of the American voter’ comment,” “Despite what Jonathan Gruber said, Romneycare didn’t ‘secretly’ rip off Medicaid” and “GOP’s anti-Obamacare push gains new momentum in wake of Gruber video.”

Kristine Coratti Kelly, Vice President of Communications for the Washington Post, said in an email to the Washington Examiner that she disagrees with the notion that the news group has focused too much attention on the GOP’s reaction to Gruber’s comments.

“[W]e have done a great deal of reporting on the matter covering a wide variety of angles,” she said.

Meanwhile, CBS News has focused on the Republican reaction:

“[W]hen the bill was being written, the administration paid Gruber almost $400,000 for technical advice on drafting the law,” CBS reported Thursday. “Republicans, for their part, turned Gruber into an all-important player.”

Other CBS Gruber headlines have proclaimed “GOP gets more fuel in fight against Obamacare” and “Found footage fuels GOP’s fight against Obamacare.”

ABC News’ sparse Gruber coverage included this headline: “How Little-Known MIT Professor Jonathan Gruber Shook Up Washington This Week,” which ignored Gruber’s prominent role in crafting the law.

NBC News, for its part, has all but ignored the story, with only a discussion on Sunday’s “Meet the Press” penetrating the blockade.

Coverage has also been light among the nation’s most widely circulated newspapers.

They’ve got too much invested in Obama to report honestly on him.

LEADERSHIP IN THE OBAMA ERA: UNCARING, UNREALISTIC, AND OUT OF TOUCH: Key ObamaCare official used threats, ‘tantrums’ to push website launch despite concerns, email claims. “A key ObamaCare official engaged in a ‘cruel and uncaring march’ to launch the federal health care website last year and wasn’t open to seeking a delay despite concerns, according to a newly revealed email from her former second-in-command. . . . In the September 2013 email to Todd Park, the former Chief Technology Officer of the U.S., Snyder characterized her then-boss, CMS Administrator Marilyn Tavenner, as a temper tantrum-throwing, demanding official who vowed the website would launch on time ‘no matter what.’ Snyder implied that Tavenner had threatened her job if Snyder was unable to deliver.”

SCOTT JOHNSON: Teach Liberals Not To Hate.

ASHE SCHOW: Are Female CEOs Also Sexist? “What’s interesting is that the smallest wage gap, though still favoring men, was seen from older female CEOs. As older male CEOs are replaced by younger male CEOs who are closing the gender wage gap (somewhat) and older female CEOs are replaced by younger female CEOs who are widening the wage gap in favor of women, could we be on the path to a reverse wage gap?”

If that happens, I promise it will be hailed as a sign of progress, not slammed as a symptom of sexism.

AT AMAZON, countdown to Black Friday deals. Browse and save!

Plus, deals galore in Health, Beauty & Grooming.

SHIRTGATE ROUNDUP: Jonah Goldberg: The feminist freakout over the scientist’s ‘girly’ shirt. “In short, feminists want a monopoly on when everyone must be outraged or offended. A few weeks ago, feminist idiots rolled out a video of little girls dressed as princesses, cursing like foul-mouthed comedian Andrew Dice Clay. Unlike Taylor, they set out to offend. But that was in support of feminism, so it was OK. (I’d like to see the parents of those kids tearfully apologizing for exploiting their kids as cheap propaganda props.)”

Related: The Era Of Male Guilt.

This is not about women being able to have careers, or stopping guys who beat their wives, or some other topic where you might expect equal rights for women to naturally arise as a direct issue. Now it’s about every minute little part of every area of your life. . . .

Which is to say that this is a power play. It reminds me of what Shelby Steele has written about the phenomenon of “white guilt”: the presumption that all white people are complicit in the crimes of slavery and segregation and are therefore guilty until they prove themselves innocent. And they can prove their innocence by embracing whatever political agenda the guardians of racial grievance choose to decree.

So call this new system “male guilt.” Every man is presumed sexist until proven otherwise, and his only hope is appease the self-appointed arbiters of offensiveness.

This will all acquire a laser-like focus very quickly, because accusation of sexism will soon have an urgent, concrete purpose: destroying all opposition to Hillary Clinton’s presumed presidential campaign. As Stephen Miller observes: “If you want to know what #ReadyForHillary will look like for 4 years… This is it.”

Yeah, I’m pretty sure that approach will make the Democrats’ gender-gap problems worse.

Also: London’s mayor launches stellar defense of scientist’s heavenly bodies shirt. What I love about the interviewer in that photo is that she’s looking at his eyes, not his chest, unlike, say Rose Eveleth. Quoth Johnson:

Those politically-correct Earthlings who ensured Taylor was “bombarded across the Internet with a hurtling dustcloud of hate” should be ashamed of themselves, Johnson wrote. After all, Taylor may study heavenly bodies, but he is not a priest.

London Mayor Boris Johnson came to Taylor’s defense after Internet sniping reduced the scientist to tears. (Reuters)

“He is a space scientist with a fine collection of tattoos, and if you are an extrovert space scientist, that is the kind of shirt that you are allowed to wear,” Johnson wrote.

The nimble-minded mayor went on to point out that the treatment of Taylor represented a double-standard when juxtaposed to that afforded Kim Kardashian; the shirt showed no exposed nipples or buttocks; and more nudity can be seen at the National Gallery than hanging in Taylor’s closet.

“What are we all – a bunch of Islamist maniacs who think any representation of the human form is an offence against God?” Johnson thundered. “This is the 21st century, for goodness’ sake.”

Yeah, it’s not turning out quite as I’d hoped. But, then, plenty of women are unhappy, too: “The femisogynists talk constantly about how women are so interested in science, technology, and engineering, but when there is a major, groundbreaking story involving those exact subjects, the only thing they can do is whine about how a shirt hurt their feelings.”

UPDATE: From the comments:

More attention should be paid to how this entire episode played out with boys. This should have been an opportunity to interest the next generation of young men in becoming scientists and space researchers. Especially the very smart, socially awkward boys who are most suited to the field.

You know, the kind of boys who are the constant target of bullies in school.

What these boys saw was that space science is no place to escape from bullies and that space scientists are not respected by women. They watched a man at the top of the space science profession humiliated and not protected by his employers and peers.

The young men — the next generation of space scientists — might not overtly think about it, but in the back of their mind how can they not feel that this is not the profession for them. They don’t want to end up like him.

That’s the message these “feminists” are sending.

Spot on.

AIRBRUSHING IN THE ERA OF OBAMA: University of Rhode Island Removes Gruber Video After It Goes Viral. First Penn, now this. You’d almost think that the higher ed establishment is in the tank for the Democrats or something.

IT’S POTEMKIN VILLAGES ALL THE WAY DOWN: Woman from “drunk girl in public” video apologizes, says she was also duped.

OUCH: WaPo: Keystone XL: Mary Landrieu’s final indignity.

She cast the deciding vote in favor of ObamaCare in exchange for the “Louisiana Purchase.” I wonder if she thinks that was worth it, now.

CULTURE OF CORRUPTION: Obamacare’s Insurance Cronyism. “The New York Times has finally caught on to the fact that the Affordable Care Act’s biggest winners are not individual Americans but huge insurance companies. A recent piece in the paper of record notes that insurance companies benefit from vast federal subsidies and the legal mandate that everyone has to buy their stuff. In return, these companies provide support for the Affordable Care Act and the Administration, including helping to fix the troubled Healthcare.gov and backing the law against its legal challengers. Out are the ringing denunciations of insurance company profiteering that were commonplace in the Democratic party before the ACA was passed; in are gratitude and paeans to ‘cooperation.'”

When government and industry are “cooperating,” it’s usually at your expense.

ANTI-CHOICE: Gruber: Seniors Should Be Limited to Three Lowest Cost Medicare Part D Plans.

SEAN DAVIS: It’s Time For Leftist Gruber Truthers To Give It A Rest. “Gruber was an Obamacare architect who helped draft the law. This is a fact regardless of whether it’s currently convenient for the Left.” Nonsense. Things that are inconvenient for the left aren’t “facts.” They’re things “Republicans claim.”

MARY LANDRIEU UNDERBUSSED: Keystone Senate Vote Fails. I think they could have gotten to 60 if they thought she had a chance of winning the runoff.

UPDATE: Democrats Are Giving Up On Mary Landrieu. If she wins anyway, maybe she’ll pay them back by switching to Republican. . . .