Hillary claims she can control her husband. Which I doubt very much. (Are they really married anyway, except in name?) Meanwhile, from Bill: We must slow our economy to stop global warming. That's done. Next problem? However, that quote was unfairly taken out of context. And, from Betsy, Washington never liked the Clintons.
Germany's nude airline. No thank you.
Organic foods: A scam
Nacreous clouds. Cool, and a sign of a cold upper atmosphere. We have warned against global cooling many times here, and I think it is beginning...we're all gonna freeze.
Grim economic hardship in America
Production function and government-run anything. S&M
Safety helmets for rodeo cowboys?
Quote from Right Thinking:
Pew has some research about the issue that matter to Republicans and Democrats, highlighted by the 38 point gap in how important it is for the government to insure the uninsured.
What struck me about the poll was the stark difference in philosophy. The Democrats overwhelming (60% or more) think the government should deal with global warming, improve jobs, reduce health care costs, deal with poverty, protect the environment, secure medicare, improve education, reduce crime, reduce the deficit, secure social security, deal with energy, strengthen the economy and defend against terrorism. That’s quite a laundry list. I’m surprised they don’t wnat the government to advise them on fashion.
Never mind that not only has government proved inadequate to deal with most of these problems (apart from crime), it’s frequently made them worse.
By contrast, the majority of Republicans only think the government should strengthen the military, strengthen the economy, deal with immigration and secure social security. Slim majorities unfortunately also favor dealing with “moral breakdown”, energy problems, improving education and reducing health care costs. It’s not that I don’t care about those things as well. it’s just that the governments record on all those issues is so dreadful.
Quoted from Strata (h/t, Winds of Change):
... the American people are leading the surge away from the hyper-partisans and the muck-raking, purity wars. Not only were the parties raging against each other - they had turned on the moderate middle and attacked with visceral hate towards anyone who could ’sell out’ and reach compromise. And of course the support for both sides of the aisle tanked as each end of the spectrum tried to see who could denigrate the midstream voters the most.
Excellent advice for Romney, from View from the Right:
I saw most of the debate Wednesday evening. McCain’s meanness, egotism, and nastiness, so unsuited for a president (though perhaps some people see it as toughness), were again apparent, and Romney again showed himself an all-round better human being. But that’s not enough. If Romney is going to stage a major rally in the next week, which he must do to stay alive in this race, he has got to express two qualities he has so far not expressed. First, he has got to show the will to lead, and I don’t just mean generic executive abilities, which are manifest in Romney, but the will and toughness to be the leader of the U.S. Second, he has got to show a killer instinct, the ability to convey an attitude of (excuse the vulgarity) “ef you” to opponents and enemies. Bush demonstrated that quality against McCain in South Carolina in 2000, and it saved his candidacy. Romney hasn’t yet demonstrated it against McCain in 2008. Instead, he comes across as a nice businessman type, not as someone with the quality of controlled anger (Reagan had that quality), someone capable of coldly sticking in the knife when necessary.
Photo: John McCain, from Dr. X. Reader H reminds us that 40 years ago, McCain was enduring daily torture in the Hanoi Hilton.
Would you want to try to run against Obama? 
Steyn revisits his 1998 review of 