Thursday, October 26, 2017

Reason #5756 - #5757 That Trump Was Elected

Regulations imposed by the Obama administration are the most expensive in American history, according to a new report by the Heritage Foundation. These countless rules and provisions—requirements that aren’t passed by elected officials but instead implemented by bureaucrats as they enforce Congressional laws—increased private sector regulatory costs by $122 billion annually, and they continue to cost the U.S. economy severely under the Trump administration. (In contrast, the George W. Bush administration increased the private sector’s regulatory burden by $68 billion, or roughly half of the increase seen in the Obama era.)

The $122 billion figure may shatter records, but it’s part of a growing trend that took off in the 1960s. During the end of the Eisenhower administration (1952-1960), the combined budget for all regulatory agencies totaled only $533 million ($3.4 billion in today’s dollars), and little more than 57,000 people were employed by the agencies. Today, the combined annual budget of regulatory agencies’ is a staggering $70 billion, and the federal government employs over a quarter million people full-time.

This means that over the past 58 years, after adjusting for inflation, government spending on regulations has increased 20-fold.
Donald Trump: King of Deregulation?
“Since January of this year, we have slashed job-killing red tape all across our economy,” the president said. “We have stopped or eliminated more regulations in the last eight months than any president has done during an entire term. It’s not even close.”

It seemed a characteristic bit of Trumpian magniloquence—he’s not only a boffo deregulator, he’s the best ever! Still, it was a remarkable claim. Trump has overseen more deregulation than George W. Bush or Ronald “government is the problem” Reagan?

But, measured by at least one significant standard, Trump’s claim is true. Patrick McLaughlin of the Mercatus Center, a free-market-oriented think tank at George Mason University, applies innovative research techniques to the study of regulation and the economy. He recently analyzed the output of regulatory restrictions promulgated in the last several presidencies, going back to Jimmy Carter.

McLaughlin found that there have been periods in some presidencies when regulatory output slowed or declined—in several years of the Reagan presidency, for instance, and in 1996, when “reinventing government” was part of Bill Clinton’s election pitch. But over the full terms of each recent president, including Reagan, regulation increased, according to McLaughlin. So far the increase in regulatory restrictions under Trump has been near to zero.

“So in that sense, the president may be right,” the economist reports. “There may not be a net increase in regulations so far under him, and since there was a net increase in every four-year term for every preceding president, going back to the ’70s, then I think that could be a safe statement.”
And you can be sure the "Deep State" is fighting tooth and nail against him.

Dammit!

Word has filtered back through the blogosphere that Allen Reinertsen, aka GOODSTUFF, has passed away. Blackmailers Don't Shoot said it well:
If some men march to the beat of their own drums, Goodstuff had a full percussion section.
An American ex-pat living in Thailand, GOODSTUFF and I were mutual followers.  Prayers and condolences to his family.


#MeToo Hits Bottom

I don't see his left hand!
Ann Althouse on the mysterious case of HW Bush's reported ass-grab of actress Heather Lind (3 years ago): Ex-Prez HW Bush accused of ass-grabbing: #MeToo overload or the beginning of the end of Old Man Privilege?
I'm reading The Daily Mail: "Former US president George HW Bush apologises after actress claims he 'sexually assaulted' her from his WHEELCHAIR in this photograph - with his wife Barbara standing by his side/Actress Heather Lind made allegations Tuesday claiming when she met former President George H.W. Bush, 93, he 'sexually assaulted' her from his wheelchair/She claimed the 'assault' happened during a photo-op with wife Barbara Bush standing by his side, and claims his wife saw the incident unfold/The now 34-year-old actress also claimed that afterwards Bush's security detail told her she shouldn't have stood next to the former president for the photo-op/Lind says this happened four years ago while she was promoting a movie/In a statement to DailyMail.com the former president has apologized for the incident saying it was an 'attempt at humor' and not meant to offend Lind."
I think she stuck just her ass in his face while jockeying for the front line of the photo-op and he pushed her away.
Now, I said "#MeToo overload" when a woman accused Elie Wiesel of taking the same advantage in a photo op and getting his hand onto the ass of the woman who stood next to him. People do line up and crowd together tightly in photographs, and one often accepts/endures the waist-grabbing that seems excusable in the interest of getting us all into the picture frame. How far down from the waist can a person go before the other person knows he's taking advantage? For the photo subject who's enjoying the contact, just the touching of the sides of the arms may be a thrill. For the one who does not want contact, even that may be repugnant.*
The whole Bush family (and GHW Bush in particular) are well noted for their propensity to apologize.
I think most contact-seekers in that situation stick to a hand at waist-level pulling the other person closer, and even that can be offensive to the one who doesn't want contact, but the would-be contact-avoider will probably put up with it, and the contact-seeker has deniability. Then what about the hand on the top of the hip? That can seem deniable too. And the fingers on the outside of the middle of the hip? Can that work? Once the contact-seeker has his fingers at the right latitude, the heel of his hand can reach the desired longitude on the globe that is the ass.


But an older man may think he has Old Man Privilege and that it's cool for him to show he's still got some life in him and everyone will think it's just fine if he forthrightly gropes the ass. HW Bush's apology calls it an "attempt at humor."
I remember something Jeb Bush said back in July 2015, when his father was in the hospital: "[My] dad gets in the hospital kind of pretty regularly at 91, he's a little frail. But when he starts telling semi-dirty jokes to the nurse, we know he's on the rebound." I quoted that in a post titled "Jeb Bush has a tin ear for sexism"and said:
A little NSFW work from Boardwalk Empire.
Apparently, Jeb thinks the old sexy nurse trope works today. The audience warmly chuckles, and Jeb thinks he's cute, because his dad is so old and sweet. But that doesn't play with me or, I suspect, with many modern women. Old men in the hospital leering at the nurses. Ugh!
I want to stress the importance — as we're fired up about sexual harassment — of not wrongly lumping things together. I wouldn't rake the dead Elie Wiesel over the coals for a 3-decade-old ass-grope (even if that happened). And I wish ancient HW well. But there is something I'm going to call Old Man Privilege that needs to be seen and rejected. It's not cute. It should not be endured as routine. A mentally incompetent old person should be treated with empathy, but women should not be expected to smile and indulge groping. HW should know better, and Jeb should certainly know better.
Figures that if there's an Old Man Privilege to one free grope, it will be cancelled just as I get there.

An interesting thought from the comments at Althouse. GHW Bush has Parkinson's Disease and is on L-Dopa. One reported side effect of L-Dopa is a reduction of inhibitions.

Linked by Wombat-socho in "Rule 5 Sunday: No, Not That Asia".

Wednesday, October 25, 2017

The Never Ending Obamacare Schadenfreude


End To ObamaCare Subsidies Leaves Congress In A Tight Spot. Trump Gives Congress A Kick In The Rear To Finally Act On Health Care.  But is one enough? While liberals complain that "Trump Executive Order On Obamacare Is “Pen And Phone” Legislation", David French (no Trump fan) Trump Was Right to End Unconstitutional Obamacare Subsidies
t’s a sad sign of our times that the constitutionality of any given government action is now seen as a wholly secondary consideration, subordinate to politics and arguments about politics. And so it is with Donald Trump’s necessary decision to halt federal payments of cost-sharing subsidies to insurance companies.

For example, here’s how the Washington Post led off its coverage of Trump’s decision: “President Trump is throwing a bomb into the insurance marketplaces created under the Affordable Care Act, choosing to end critical payments to health insurers that help millions of lower-income Americans afford coverage.” . . .
The Constitution doesn't matter to Dems when it's contrary to their wishes.

18 States Sue Over Trump-Halted ObamaCare Payments. You'll never guess who controls those states. Trump Opposes Bipartisan Obamacare Rescue Plan, where "bipartisan" equals 1 Republican and 47 Democrats.

Trump reverses course on emerging Senate health care deal
A bipartisan Senate deal to curb the growth of health insurance premiums is reeling after President Donald Trump reversed course and opposed the agreement, and top congressional Republicans and conservatives gave it a frosty reception.

Sens. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., and Patty Murray, D-Wash., announced their accord Tuesday after weeks of negotiations and five days after Trump said he was halting federal subsidies to insurers. Under the lawmakers’ agreement, the payments would continue for two years while states were given more leeway to let insurers sidestep some coverage requirements imposed by President Barack Obama’s health law.

In remarks Tuesday in the Rose Garden, Trump called the deal “a very good solution” that would calm insurance markets, giving him time to pursue his goal of scrapping the Affordable Care Act, the target of Republican derision since it was signed into law in 2010.
Although top Democrats and some Republicans praised the Alexander-Murray agreement, Trump backed off after a day of criticism from many in the GOP.

In an evening speech at the conservative Heritage Foundation, he said that “while I commend” the work by the two senators, “I continue to believe Congress must find a solution to the Obamacare mess instead of providing bailouts to insurance companies.”
Sorry Everybody, But Trump Hasn't Instigated The Obamacare Apocalypse
The Trump White House has issued two Obamacare-related policy announcements this week: announcements that some characterize as “gutting” or “sabotaging” the health care law. But a sober, factual analysis reveals that the Trump decisions will be fairly modest—and largely positive—in their effect.
. . .
Trump’s executive order simply reverts back to the pre-2016 rules. When some pundits hysterically describe this change as the “sabotage” and “gutting” of Obamacare, they’re talking about rules that were in place for 7.5 of Obama’s 8 years in office.
Iowa abandons bold attempt to jettison ACA rules
Iowa is abandoning its quest to shed major elements of the Affordable Care Act, after federal health officials failed to approve the plan in time for the insurance-buying season that begins in just over a week.

The state’s withdrawal comes two months after President Trump telephoned a top federal health official with instructions to reject Iowa’s proposal.

In announcing the withdrawal of what the state has called a crucial “stopgap” plan to prevent its marketplace from collapsing, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) on Monday did not mention the president’s intervention, instead thanking Trump for trying to repeal the ACA and blaming the law itself for what she called its inflexibility.
Much to the Washington Post's disappointment.  The Health 202: Obamacare may lose 1.1 million people because of advertising cuts. Do they really think advertising is that effective?

Warren: fighting for a single-payer healthcare system is a “winning issue” for Democrats nationally in the 2018 midterm elections.
“Healthcare is a basic human right and that means we’re going to get Medicare for all, it means we are going to make the kind of changes we need to make in this country so everyone gets access to healthcare and nobody goes broke doing it,” she said. “I think this is about our values. It’s about what we are willing to get out there and fight for.”
What single-payer meansBritain's National Health Service provokes fury with indefinite surgery ban for smokers and obese. Who among us has no bad habits? Besides Georgia, I mean.

Reason #5755 That Trump Was Elected

A double today to make up for the day I missed while travelling: By way of Wombat-socho's "In The Mailbox: 10.24.17" the Weasel Zippers point out that the Number Of Americans On Food Stamps Plummets By 1.5 Million After Trump Takes Office:
Barack Obama inconsolable upon hearing the news.
Nearly 1.5 million Americans dropped off the food stamp rolls since President Trump’s inauguration in January 2017, according to the latest U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) statistics on food stamp enrollment..
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participation dropped to 41,203,721 as of July 2017, the most recent data available from the USDA, from 42,691,363 in January 2017 when Trump took office.
According to the latest data, SNAP enrollment decreased by 3.48 percent, or 1,487,642, since Donald Trump began his presidency.
From May to July alone, nearly 400,000 Americans got off of food stamps, and the trend shows that enrollment has been consistently falling every month of Trump’s presidency.
Keep reading…
What's gonna happen if they learn to feed themselves without handouts?

Reason #5754 That Trump Was Elected

Venezuela’s biggest market for crude sales -- the U.S. -- is becoming a harder and harder place for the socialist nation’s oil producer to do business as sanctions and diminishing quality controls discourage would-be buyers.

Oil sales to U.S. buyers have fallen for two straight months and now are 56 percent lower than their 2016 average, according to ship-tracking data compiled by Bloomberg. Ever since President Donald Trump slammed the regime of Nicolas Maduro with sanctions in August, American refiners have found banks reluctant to provide letters of credit for purchases of oil from state-controlled Petroleos de Venezuela SA.
Socialism, the dream that keeps on killing.

Great Tits Evolve in Response to Pressure from Man

In a study published Thursday in Science, researchers report that great tits in the United Kingdom evolved to have lengthier bills in a matter of decades. The longer the beak, the easier the access to food in the hanging backyard buffets popular in Britain — and, the data show, the healthier the offspring: Longer-beaked birds produced more chicks that fledged.

The researchers came upon this example of rapid, possibly human-driven natural selection by starting not with the birds’ beaks, but with their DNA. Both Britain and the Netherlands are home to great tit populations that have been studied for many years, and the team suspected that the birds’ genes might hold clues into whether they’ve evolved differently.
So what the heck did you think I meant? Although that might well be true, too.
But after sifting through the genomes of nearly 3,000 birds, the researchers spotted some distinctive sequences. The related genes in humans, they discovered, control face shape. What’s more, the areas where differences popped up were associated with beak shape in Darwin’s famed finches.

“So we’re thinking, ‘Well, this looks like a beak thing here,'” Spurgin said. “What that told us was that the same bits of DNA that control beak length are actually under natural selection.”

Further evidence followed. Measurements dating to the 1970s showed that the U.K. great tits’ beaks had increased in length by about .2 millimeters, Spurgin said — a small but “observable” difference. The birds with the longer-beaked gene variants successfully raised about one more chick every five years than those with the short-billed variants.
0.2 millimeters longer? That's a width known to us weekend carpenters as a "cunthair."

Are we going to tolerate this gross violation of the "Prime Directive?" Don't we need federal bird feeder inspectors to make sure that bird seed is equally available to all birds, regardless of bill length, paid for by nearly prohibitively expensive bird feeding licenses?

Oh, all right, some more Great Tits:

Tuesday, October 24, 2017

Twice Today at the Bay

Skye was not nice at all, demanding that we take her on a walk before lunch. Georgia beat me down to the beach, and by the time I caught up to her, she already had two teeth.
The beach really changed since yesterday We had a storm with 40 mph winds overnight, and sand moved all over, piling up in some places and stripping away in others.


After 3 PM, I decided to take advantage of the West winds, and went fishing.
Fishing was slow. I caught exactly one fish, but at least it was a 24 inch Striped Bass, so we'll get a couple of meals off it. Clouds in the Southeast lit up in the sunset.

Reason #5753 That Trump Was Elected

"Hanoi" Jane Fonda: Jane Fonda on Whether She’s ‘Proud’ of America: ‘No, but I’m Proud of the Resistance’ Against Trump
Actress Jane Fonda said Monday that she is not proud of America today but is proud of those who continue to protest Donald Trump's presidency.

BBC's Stephen Sackur asked Fonda, a political activist, on "HARDtalk" about her lifelong activism, starting with her trip to North Vietnam in 1972.

Asked if she regrets going to Hanoi during the Vietnam War, Fonda said she does not regret going but does regret a picture showing her with North Vietnamese troops on an antiaircraft gun.

"The thing that I regret is that on my last day there, I made the mistake of going to a ceremony at an anti-aircraft gun," she said. "It wasn't being used. There were no airplanes or anything like that. There was a ceremony. I was asked to sing and people were laughing and so forth and I was led, and I sat down."

"And then I got up and as I walked away, I realized, ‘Oh my gosh. It's going to look like I am against my own country's soldiers and siding with the enemy, which is the last thing in the world that was true," she continued.


A photograph of Fonda with North Vietnamese troops on an antiaircraft gun that would have been used to shoot down American planes particularly angers veterans, and helped earn her the nickname "Hanoi Jane" when she returned to the U.S.

Sackur followed up by asking if it is effective for celebrities to protest Trump at award ceremonies and whether she is "proud of the American today."

"I don't know, all I know is, and I say this as a dyed in wool Democrat, the Democratic Party has failed us," Fonda said. "Clinton failed us, and in a way the Obama administration have all neglected the very people who voted for Trump, who used to be the base of the Democratic Party."

"Let me ask you a simple question: are you proud of America today?" Sackur asked.

"No, but, I'm proud of the resistance," she said. "I'm proud of the people who are turning out in unprecedented numbers and continue over and over and over again to protest what Trump is doing. I’m very proud of them, that core."
One could do worse than always vote against Jane's preferred candidates.

Linked by Wombat-socho in "Rule 5 Sunday: No, Not That Asia."

Weinstein Controversy Not Selling Well in Italy

Actress Flees Italy as ‘Sophisticated’ Europeans Side With Harvey Weinstein
Our “allies” are so thoughtful and enlightened:
Italian movie actress and director Asia Argento is facing pushback in her home country after speaking out about an alleged rape at the hands of disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein. While Argento’s courage in speaking about what happened to her was praised in Hollywood, and helped encourage at least 40 women to speak out about their own experiences of assault at the hands of Weinstein, public opinion in Italy has sided more with Weinstein than with Argento, according to Quartz’s Annalisa Merelli.
 Asia was apparently sent in wired to tape Harvey in mid-harassment by Ronan Farrow.
Merelli points out that the opinion writers have been remarkably bold in their condemnation of Argento and other actresses speaking out against sexual assault — former journalist and MP Renato Farina, for instance, has suggested that the assaults described by actresses are “prostitution, not rape.” Vittorio Feltri, editor in chief of Libero, a right wing populist newspaper, said that since Weinstein didn’t physically harm Argento that the sex must have been consensual — and that, if anything, Argento should be thankful to Weinstein for forcibly performing oral sex on her. Politician Vittorio Sgarbi went still further, arguing that Weinstein “was actually assaulted by her.”
Prominent Italian women have targeted Argento as well, questioning why she didn’t speak out earlier about the rape or claiming that she deserved what happened to her since she willingly visited Weinstein in his hotel room.

In wake of the public outcry against her, Argento has said that she is leaving Italy for Germany to escape the “climate of tension” and “victim blaming.”
“Italy,” Argento said, “is far behind the rest of the world in its view of women.”
(Hat-tip: Instapundit.) Every American woman I’ve known who has traveled in Europe has talked about how different attitudes are there. Especially in France and Italy, women report that the cat-calling is horrific. In fact, if you pay attention to complaints about cat-calling in America, you’ll notice that the problem has an ethnic aspect. When a video of a woman being harassed on the streets of New York went viral in 2014, nearly all the harassers were black or Latino. This resulted in a discussion among feminists of whether complaining about cat-calling is racist. This is how “intersectionality” works: Only white men are to blame for sexism — and only American white men, because every American liberal believes Europe is better than America.
I'm a little less harsh on Italy than Stacy. It seems to me that the Italians understand and tolerate the transactional nature of sex among the elites more than we in the United States, witness Silvio Berlusconi and his various women, and Cicciolina, pornstar and parliamentarian.  I suspect the idea of Asia Argento carrying out a sting on a fellow filmmaker.

Although I had no personal experiences in Italy (being a 65 year old man apparently made me immune), the two young women on our tour did report that Italian men were almost laughably forward in their advances, but took rebuffs as if it happened a lot.

Linked by Wombat-socho in "Rule 5 Sunday: No, Not That Asia" and "FMJRA 2.0: Deep Dark Depression, Excessive Misery."

Monday, October 23, 2017

Politicos Beg for the Bay Journal

From the Bay Journal itself: MD senators call on EPA to reverse Bay Journal decision
Warning that its decision to cut grant funding for the Bay Journal sets a “dangerous nationwide precedent,” Maryland’s two U.S. senators asked Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt to reverse his agency’s action in a letter Wednesday.

Sens. Ben Cardin and Chris Van Hollen said the Bay Journal has “done a sterling job of delivering returns on investments,” and that there was “no legitimate cause to deprive the residents of the Chesapeake Bay watershed of such a vital source of information.”

In the letter, the two Democratic senators said that “we are aware of no other examples of high-performing grantees having their EPA funding revoked under similar circumstances, meaning that this action sets a dangerous nationwide precedent.”

On Aug. 23, the EPA unexpectedly notified Bay Journal Media, the nonprofit organization that publishes the Bay Journal, of its intent to revoke a six-year award after only two years of funding because of an unexplained “shift in priorities.”
This could be "Reason #5753 That Trump Was Elected"
The senators said any notion that Congress has shifted its priorities regarding the Chesapeake Bay “could not be further from the truth.” While the White House has proposed eliminating funding for EPA’s Chesapeake Bay Program, the senators noted that the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee this summer voted to reauthorize the Bay Program at $90 million — the highest amount ever approved.

The senators noted that the Bay Journal supports the mission of state-federal agreements signed by state governors and previous EPA administrators in 2000 and 2014 which — like federal statutes establishing the Bay Program — call for promoting public information, education and stewardship as part of the Bay restoration effort.

“The mission of Bay Journal Media is directly in line with the priorities of the Congress and other elected officials throughout the Chesapeake Bay Watershed,” the letter stated.

They noted that the EPA’s most recent grant review praised the Bay Journal for “continued outstanding work.”
Although I use it quite a lot, the Bay Journal has always irritated me because it acts as a paid mouthpiece for the EPA and NOAA in the Bay region. From their "About us":
Publication is made possible through grants from the EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office, the Campbell Foundation for the Environment, the Town Creek Foundation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Chesapeake Bay Office, the Chesapeake Bay Trust, and by donations from individuals.
Although they add:  "Views expressed in the Bay Journal do not necessarily reflect those of any governmental or grant-making organization." it's rare indeed when they differ significantly from their master's voice.

So there are private sources they could tap? Go for it!

Reason #5752 That Trump Was Elected

The first action in question was Trump's Sept. 5 announcement that he would withdraw Barack Obama's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which gave immigrants brought to the United States illegally when they were children protection from deportation.

Obama acted despite his initial explanation that the president only has the authority to faithfully execute laws, not to make them. So DACA was dressed up with a fig leaf argument that he was only exercising the kind of discretion prosecutors employ when they choose to bring one case and not another.

A nearly identical argument was rejected by federal courts considering the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents program -- which extended protection to undocumented immigrants with kids who are U.S. citizens -- decisions left in place by the Supreme Court last year. So both DAPA and DACA looked like dead ducks legally anyway.

The second of Trump's actions was his Oct. 12 statement that he would suspend cost-sharing reduction payments to health insurance companies. The Obama administration had been making CSR payments since 2014 even though Obamacare's Section 1401 does not appropriate the money for the payments authorized in Section 1402.

This was blatantly unconstitutional. "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law," states Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution. The House of Representatives sued, and in May 2016, U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer ruled that the billions paid in subsidies were illegal.

Administration lawyers made complex, sophisticated arguments that Obama's clearly illegal actions were actually legal. I'm a graduate of Yale Law School; I know how this is done. Many Americans suspect that condescending elite law school graduates are contemptuous of them and their naive belief that words mean what they say. My experience is that those suspicions are well-founded.

So what to do now about DACA recipients ("dreamers") and insurance companies denied their CSRs?

Trump has made clear that he would sign a DACA-like bill together with some 70 other immigration law changes, including mandatory E-Verify for job applicants, creation of the "southern border wall," hiring more immigration judges and replacing extended-family "chain migration" with a skills-based point system.

Democrats are bridling at these demands, and mainstream media quickly declared any deal impossible. But polls show that most are highly popular, and Democrats can't pass legislation by themselves.
It's almost like they don't really believe in the Constitution or something.

Headed Home

Sorry about the lack of content. We're headed home, and I thought I'd share this shot of the fall color from the top of the Appalachians as we cross back to Slower Maryland.


Saturday, October 21, 2017

Reason #5751 That Trump Was Elected


Melania Trump is embracing a more active and public schedule as first lady – but she still runs one of the leanest East Wing operations in recent history.

According to a Fox News analysis of White House personnel reports, Melania Trump has significantly reduced the number of aides on the first lady's office payroll in comparison to her predecessor, Michelle Obama.

During then-President Barack Obama’s first year in office, 16 people were listed working for Michelle Obama, earning a combined $1.24 million a year.

This year, just four people were listed working for Melania Trump as of June. Their salaries totaled $486,700.
Plus, she probably doesn't trust them not to be moles for the press.

Linked at Pirate's Cove in the weekly "Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup" and links. Linked by Wombat-socho in "Rule 5 Sunday: No, Not That Asia."

Rule 5 Saturday - Kim Basinger


I was reminded of Kim Basinger when I posted the video of Tom Petty's "Last Dance with "Mary Jane's Last Dance" when he died. Best dead girl ever!
Kimila Ann "Kim" Basinger (/ˈbeɪsɪŋər/ BAY-sing-ər; born December 8, 1953) is an American actress, singer and former fashion model. Following a successful modeling career in New York during the 1970s, Basinger moved to Los Angeles where she began her acting career on television in 1976. She starred in several made-for-TV films, including a remake of From Here to Eternity (1979), before making her feature debut in the 1981 drama Hard Country. She won the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress for her performance as Lynn Bracken in the 1997 film L.A. Confidential.
Shoot, she's almost as old as I am!
Basinger came to prominence playing Bond girl Domino Petachi in the 1983 film Never Say Never Again, opposite Sean Connery, and went on to receive a Golden Globe nomination for her role as Memo Paris in The Natural (1984). She starred as Elizabeth in the controversial erotic romantic drama 9½ Weeks (1986) with Mickey Rourke, and as Vicki Vale in Tim Burton's blockbuster Batman (1989), which remains the highest-grossing film of her career. For her role in L.A. Confidential, she also won the Golden Globe for Best Supporting Actress and the SAG Award for Best Supporting Actress.

. . .  Basinger met her second husband, Alec Baldwin, in 1990 when they played lovers in The Marrying Man, and they married on August 19, 1993. They appeared together in the remake of The Getaway (1994) and played themselves in a 1998 episode of The Simpsons, in which Basinger corrected Homer Simpson on the pronunciation of her last name and polished her Oscar statuette. Basinger and Baldwin have a daughter, Ireland Eliesse Baldwin (born October 23, 1995). They separated on December 5, 2000,  and divorced on February 3, 2002. In 2008, Baldwin wrote a book which dealt with the contentious custody battle with Basinger over their daughter.
The ancient Yiddish proverb: Too soon old, too late smart.
In 1981, Basinger posed for a famous nude pictorial for Playboy, which didn't appear for two years, until she used it to promote her breakthrough role as the Bond girl Domino Petachi in Never Say Never Again (1983), where she starred opposite Sean Connery. In his review of the film, Gary Arnold of The Washington Post said Basinger "looks like a voluptuous sibling of Liv Ullmann and has a certain something." Basinger said her subsequent Playboy appearance led to further opportunities, such as Barry Levinson's The Natural (1984), co-starring Robert Redford, for which she earned a Golden Globe nomination as Best Supporting Actress.
 A few NSFW pics from the good old days.

Linked at Pirate's Cove in the weekly "Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup" and links. Rule 5 Sunday done come on Tuesday with Wombat-socho's "Late Night With Rule Five Tuesday: Rebel Girls" and "FMJRA 2.0: Wolf Creek Pass".

Friday, October 20, 2017

Teeth (and More) at the Beach

What wonderful weather! Mid October and it's 75 and sunny!
A couple of really nice shark's teeth today. Georgia found the big Snaggletooth lower on the top right, and I was feeling kind of jealous. Then I found the Mako lower (center) 10 steps away. I just picked up the Tiger (contortus) close by. 12 teeth total for the day.
Now a few pics from yesterday. A baby Chain Pickerel hiding in the rip rap at Flag Harbor. Do you see it? Excellent camouflage.
Someone using the flat water near the shore to practice touch and go landings.

I have no clue what this ship is doing. Servicing the CBOS buoys? I forgot to look on Marinetraffic.com to see what it was yesterday.

This Might Be Overstating It Just a Little

A Hard Shore Is a Dead Shore
The land beneath Chesapeake Bay, the largest estuary in the United States, is sinking. Couple that with climate change, and the sea level is rising twice as fast as the global average, chewing away at shorelines and drowning islands. Private landowners, who occupy about 85 percent of the shoreline, have responded with walls, rocks, and barriers, which have helped slow the losses. But evidence is growing that this coastal hardening may be insufficient at holding back future seas, and is doing serious damage to more than a dozen fish and crustacean species. Now, planners and landowners are hoping engineered living shorelines can solve both problems at once.

A hardened shore makes life more difficult for trout, perch, crab, and other species that need a natural shoreline to thrive, says Matthew Kornis, who recently published a paper evaluating the effect of shoreline hardening on these species.

Kornis, a fish biologist with the US Fish and Wildlife Service, studied hundreds of sites in and around Chesapeake Bay, from natural beaches and marshlands, to shores lined with riprap (cages of loose rock) and bulkheads (walls, often wooden). The harder the shoreline, he found, the harder hit the species. This was true even for riprap, which is often considered more environmentally friendly than sheer walls.

Kornis says natural shorelines offer things hardened shorelines don’t: juvenile fish live in the nooks and crannies of rocky shorelines, for instance, and these environments serve as nurseries. Fish also feed within beds of seaweed and seagrass. Hardening decimates these complex habitats, leaving nothing to eat and nowhere to hide.

Hardening isn’t unique to Chesapeake Bay. Estimates suggest that about 14 percent of the United States’ coast had been hardened, and the shorelines of Europe and China are also heavily armored. While the motivations for reinforcement vary (development, industry, sea level rise), most Chesapeake Bay residents are trying to protect their property from rampant erosion. Sea level rise is a relatively new problem for many coasts, but land subsidence means it’s been the norm in the Chesapeake for a long time.

“Erosion has been happening for centuries,” says Zoe Johnson, climate change coordinator with the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Chesapeake Bay. Tide gauge data shows the water rose nearly a third of a meter in the past century. Similarly, the sea moved inland by roughly half a meter a year on average. But these rates are accelerating as climate change adds a rising sea to sinking land. “The influence of global factors will outpace the land subsidence,” she says.

In the early 2000s, Maryland convened a climate change task force, including Johnson, to study how to better adapt to these future seas. They identified one promising method that seemed to stand up to the sea: living shorelines.

Designs vary widely, but most living shorelines start with a barrier, such as a rock wall, oyster reef, or log, placed several meters out in the water. The barrier is then backfilled with plants and soil to make a marshy buffer zone. In 2008, Maryland passed the Living Shorelines Protection Act, which Johnson says requires owners to prove that a living shoreline will not work in their location before they can get a permit to construct a wall.

Along with erosion control, living shorelines have other benefits. Researchers in North Carolina showed that living shorelines can act as nurseries for fish and crustaceans, the way natural shorelines do.

Bhaskar Subramanian, the shoreline conservation section chief for the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, says his job now is to teach people about living shorelines, which he speaks of with infectious zeal. He sets up information sessions for planners and residents, talks to marine contractors and engineers about how to build living shorelines, and consults with homeowners about what would work on their properties.
I was present at the conception of the project that lead to this study. It was clear at the outset that NOAA and the rest of the management  agencies involved were aching for studies to justify their taking further control over the shoreline. One state regulator (not named in the article) got up and gave an impassioned speech about how we needed to disabuse land owners of their property rights.

But I'm sure much of what he says is true. The biota in Chesapeake Bay are adapted to soft shorelines, and many don't thrive around hard ones. And yet, some of my best fishing spots are along rip rap walls, which seem to attract a variety of animals, and predator fish that prey on them. I wonder how, if they are dead.

Reason #5750 That Trump Was Elected

Poll: Plurality Of Voters Believe News Media Fabricate Stories About Trump
A plurality of voters believe that major news organizations fabricate stories about President Trump, according to a new Morning Consult poll.


Forty-six percent of the 1,991 registered voters surveyed said they think members of the media make up stories about the president, while 37 percent believe news organizations do not make up stories about Trump or his administration.
. . .
The survey’s findings are not surprising, given that many major news outlets, including CNN, Vox, MSNBC, BuzzFeed, Slate, The Daily Beast, The Week, The Washington Post, The New York Times, and others have all reported numerous news items about Trump and his administration that turned out to be partially or completely false.

Remember when Politico reported that Secretary of the Treasury Steve Mnuchin kicked a little old lady out of her home over 27 cents? As it turns out, that story was full of glaring errors.

There was also that time when The Daily Mail claimed Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch founded a student group called “Fascism Forever.” After the story was picked up by numerous outlets, it was debunked and deemed to be totally false. A Time reporter also claimed the Trump administration removed the Martin Luther King Jr. bust from the Oval Office, a claim that was untrue. It’s no wonder only six percent of Americans say they trust the news media.
Donald Trump's entry into politics has caused the plaster to flake off  the facade journolistic integrity faster than ever before. There's not a lot left showing.

Fish Pic Friday - Pike

This week's fish are Pike, several species worth:
Esox is a genus of freshwater fish, the only living genus in the family Esocidae—the esocids which were endemic to North America and Eurasia during the Paleogene through present.

The species of this genus are known as pike and pickerel. The type species is E. lucius, the northern pike.

The big pike species are native to the Palearctic and Nearctic ecozones, ranging across northern North America and from Western Europe to Siberia in Eurasia.

Pikes have the elongated, torpedo-like form of predatory fishes, with sharply pointed heads and sharp teeth. Their coloration is typically grey-green with a mottled or spotted appearance with stripes along their backs, providing camouflage among weeds. Individual pike marking patterns are unique, like fingerprints. Pike can grow to a maximum recorded length of 1.83 m (6 ft), reaching a maximum recorded weight of 35 kg (77 lb)

Currently, seven recognized species are placed in this genus:

Esox aquitanicus Denys, Dettai, Persat, Hautecœur & Keith, 2014 (Aquitanian pike)
Esox americanus J. F. Gmelin, 1789 (American pickerel)
Esox cisalpinus Bianco & Delmastro, 2011 (Southern pike)
Esox lucius Linnaeus, 1758 (Northern pike)
Esox masquinongy Mitchill, 1824 (Muskellunge)
Esox niger Lesueur, 1818 (Chain pickerel)
Esox reichertii Dybowski, 1869 (Amur pike)
Esox masquinongy X Esox lucius  Dybowski, 1869 (Tiger Musskellunge)
Chain Pickerel are somewhat tolerant of salt water, and are found in slightly brackish waters in Chesapeake Bay. In fact, I saw some today hanging around in Flag Harbor. I have caught a few, and once got a follow from a huge Musky (in Canada).

Linked at Pirate's Cove in the weekly "Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup" and links. Rule 5 Sunday done come on Tuesday with Wombat-socho's "Late Night With Rule Five Tuesday:
Rebel Girls"
.

Thursday, October 19, 2017

The Chick Takes On the Chief


Russia gets new candidate for president: The daughter of Putin’s political mentor
 Ksenia Sobchak — the socialite, journalist, former opposition figure and daughter of Vladimir Putin’s political mentor — announced her candidacy for president Wednesday, courting a protest vote in a presidential bid that appeared to get official approval from the Kremlin.

In a campaign statement in the Russian daily Vedomosti that barely mentioned Putin and focused instead on public dissatisfaction with Russian politics, she said that she was “outside of ideology” and not a fan of Russia’s annexation of Crimea (though she denied being against it).

“I am ‘against all,’ ” she wrote, announcing her candidacy. “You are not for Sobchak, you are voting against all — against Yavlinsky, Zyuganov, and Putin.” The first two refer to opposition candidates Grigory Yavlinsky and Gennady Zyuganov. Putin, who has not announced his candidacy despite the elections being less than six months off, has been president or prime minister of Russia since 1999.

In the past six months, Russia has seen a rise in protest sentiment among young people in high school and college, and the government is looking to channel that anger into a safe political movement. Those young protesters were largely inspired by the anti-corruption whistleblower and protest leader Alexei Navalny, who has been disqualified from running by multiple felony charges that he claims are politically motivated.

Sobchak announced her candidacy on the independent TV Rain channel. Half an hour earlier, Dmitry Peskov, Putin’s personal spokesman, told the channel that her candidacy was seen as legitimate by the Kremlin.

“If I understand correctly, Ksenia fully falls under the provision of our Constitution,” he said. “She is a Russian citizen who, according to the Constitution, may run for president, naturally, after the completion of all necessary procedures and formalities, which are also spelt out in our laws.”

Sobchak is the daughter of Anatoly Sobchak, the former St. Petersburg mayor who hired a young Putin as his deputy mayor in the tumultuous 1990s. It has been rumored, though never confirmed, that Ksenia Sobchak is Putin’s goddaughter.

Sobchak’s father died in 2000. Her mother, Lydumila Narusova, is a former member of Russia’s upper house of parliament. Sobchak, who is not backed by a political party, must collect 300,000 signatures to register as an independent candidate. She has an Instagram account with 5.2 million followers and is a regular guest at black-tie events.

Putin has not said that he plans to step down. He has been in power since New Year’s Eve 1999, when President Boris Yeltsin announced he was stepping down. Putin, who has shuffled between the presidency and the role of prime minister, has been in power for more than 6,630 days, a month longer than former Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev’s 6,601 days in office.
They could do worse, and probably will.

Linked by Evi L. Bloggerlady in "Eleanor Tomlinson"  and "Heida Reed." Rule 5 Sunday done come on Tuesday with Wombat-socho's "Late Night With Rule Five Tuesday: Rebel Girls".

Reason #5749 That Trump Was Elected

Nine months after President Trump promised to defeat ISIS "quickly and effectively," U.S.-backed forces captured Raqqa, which until Tuesday had served as the ISIS capital. The battle now is over who deserves credit: Trump or President Obama.

Trump, not surprisingly, claims it for himself: "It had to do with the people I put in and it had to do with rules of engagement," Trump said in a radio interview.

Before dismissing this as typical Trump self-aggrandizement, consider that for several years Obama insisted that a quick and decisive victory against ISIS was all but impossible.

After belittling ISIS as a "JV" team and then being surprised by its advances, Obama finally got around to announcing a strategy to "degrade and ultimately destroy" the militant Islamic group.

As his strategy dragged on and seemed to go nowhere, Obama kept telling the country that this was just the nature of the beast. "It will take time to eradicate a cancer like (ISIS). It will take time to root them out."

"This is a long-term and extremely complex challenge."

"This will not be quick."

"There will be setbacks and there will be successes."

"We must be patient and flexible in our efforts; this is a multiyear fight and there will be challenges along the way."

And he kept insisting that winning the war against ISIS has as much to do with public relations as it did weapons. "This broader challenge of countering extremism is not simply a military effort. Ideologies are not defeated with guns, they are defeated by better ideas."

What Obama didn't say is that reason defeating ISIS was taking so long was of how he was fighting it.

A former senior military commander in the region told the Washington Examiner that the Obama White House was micromanaging the war "to the degree that it was just as bad, if not worse, than during the Johnson administration." Johnson, you will recall, once bragged that "they can't bomb an outhouse in Vietnam without my permission."

Contrast this with Trump. Rather than talk endlessly about how long and hard the fight would be, Trump said during his campaign that, if elected, he would convene his "top generals and give them a simple instruction. They will have 30 days to submit to the Oval Office a plan for soundly and quickly defeating ISIS." . . .
Turns out that to win a war you actually have to hate the enemy, and try to kill him, deny them land and materials.

For as long as there have been men, there has been war, big or small, and the scheme is pretty simple. Attack and kill the enemy, take over their territory and their means of subsistence, until they give up.

Somewhere along the line progressives, as they usually do, decided that that was all wrong. Coddle the enemy, and give them safe space to flourish. It worked so well in Vietnam, they decided to use it a general principle.

Midnite Music - "Johann Sebastian Bach, Sonata II BWV 1003, Fuga"



Tatyana Ryzhkova
I don’t practice at the day of the concert. It’s too late. I mean, if you cannot play this one or that one difficult passage two days before, it doesn’t help you if you’ll play it the whole day until your entrance on the stage. The only thing that could help you at this moment is to relax and pray.

Rule 5 Sunday done come on Tuesday with Wombat-socho's ;"Late Night With Rule Five Tuesday:
Rebel Girls"
.