What is it with the popularity of wines that run smack into the far right end of the dryness scale? Personally I don’t get into vintages that make we want for an ice tea chaser after taking a swig. That’s not to say that only Reislings and dessert wines are what I shoot for, but find me a sommelier who I don’t have  to ask whether or not I have a goblet of shiraz or a mug of red dustbunniees with interesting flow characteristics.

Just sayin’.

racist rac-ist (noun) \ˈrā-ˌsist\ 1. A person or policy that doesn’t strictly comport with a liberal (see PROGRESSIVE) political view regarding any subject that does not involve any form of personal ancestry, skin color, religion or national origin*.

Usage example:
Person 1: “That hamburger is too expensive.”
Person 2: “Racist!”

(*)

Homeland Security Chief Janet "The Batteries in My Hummingbird Are Dead" Napolitano

The headline might as well be completely accurate for all the difference it will make.

In a case of FAR too little too late, Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano stated that unmanned predator drones will be monitoring the Texas-Mexico border in order to enforce immigration enforcement, according to a brief update now on Drudge.

“Big Sis” declared that over the past 15 months, federal law enforcement initiatives have made the border more secure than in any other time in history, the SAN ANTONIO EXPRESS-NEWS reports in Wednesday editions.

You mean, so safe that Arizona felt it had to take over authority from a non-responsive Federal law enforcement effort? So safe that Mexican drug violence is getting so bad that people are dying in the streets?

Left unsaid is that drones are only tools used to gather intelligence, not act on it (barring equipping them with offensive armament, which isn’t going to happen), and without fortifying border agents and marshals on the border, streamlining deportation and prosecution efforts, and building walls, Napolitano can fly as many RC hobby planes as her little heart desires and it won’t make a singular difference to the illegal immigration problem.

…is a small detail buried in a few of the writeups concerning the search ‘n seizure of Jason Chen’s ‘puter equipment- among them, here. It states that Apple, among other companies, control how a law enforcement agency might seem to be doing the bidding of Steve Jobs’ whims. I’ve been wondering about the REACT task force’s backing of the Apple Corporation and it’s presence on the steering committee for said task force. Hot Air picked up on a Yahoo! news item and seems to be wondering on along the same lines as I am; whether law enforcement task forces might be unconstitutional, or at least in violation of impartiality rules, if their own governing entities are party to the investigations at hand.

Preceded in the article is the debate whether Jason Chen should be considered a journalist for purposes of protection under the reporter shield law. Given that the overwhelming majority of people think that Gizmodo is a legit New Media site, I don’t see how the notion of the possible payment for the iPhone negates the shield protections: the law does not have language akin to “Cannot confiscate any material of a journalist unless said journalist greased somebody’s palm to pick up evidence.” Or at least I didn’t read that part; tell me if I missed it.

Anyhow, I am nailed to the news feeds until Gawker’s lawyers peel themselves away from their turbocharged Smith Coronas long enough to file a complaint to the court in the area. More than anything else, I love watching a good geekfight and this will likely prove to be a doozy.

Edited to include additional link for background.

A month after contentious legislative tactics saw the passing of the health care bill, the Senate Health committee is trying to implement a bill that imposes price controls over the health care premiums that are likely to kill, or at least functionally nationalize, private health care insurers.

Cost control claims before and during the voting sessions, although never convincing a majority of the public but seemed to give some on-the-fence Representatives some cover of plausible deniability, turned out to be inaccurate -if not wildly apocryphal- and the new bill from the Health committee is an attempt to “fix” costs (someone try and get former Pres. Carter to comment on how well price controls work).

Not mentioned in the article is the assumtion that this bill would also be a second pass at trying to convert a few Republican Senate and House members so the inevitable “bipartisan” label can be attached and some type of electoral escape hatch be given to the Dems come November.

This bill is as equally dangerous a trap for Republican members to fall into as the argument will surely be made that opposition to this “fix” bill would be the chance to for members of the right to address whatever problems they saw in the original bill (never mind the fact that any conservative amendments would stand a donut’s chance with Rosie O’Donnell than being attached). Vocal members of the right would be castigated as being being purely the party of “no” and placing partisanship over fixing “an otherwise good bill”. However badly they might play up this position, I think it’s in the best interest of the conservative position to continue to own the “no” moniker under the view that a purely Democratic program is both fatally flawed in principle and that no amount of fiddling with trivialities will change that reality.

Of course, Republican fingerprints on the fix won’t help us and allow the plan’s authors to begin scapegoating in earnest.

UPDATE: Posted without further comment:

Left: US Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) and right: one nutria, a scavenger of the order Rodentia

…And so I’ll speak!

According to Say Anything’s article, economist Ernie Goss details how the real mess with the VAT tax (apart from being a huge drain on an economy trying to wrestle some sort of recovery out of bad long term indicators) is that the nature of VAT exclusions turns the marketplace into a haywired system of conflicts and idiocy. One of the examples used for this is that Europe excluded bra sizes up to 34B because it is assumed that this is children’s apparel Yet, I have female family members well beyond the ‘age of majority’ that wear this size or smaller.

A VAT is appealing in that it is easy to administer and punishes consumption, not work. However, exempted products in the name of fairness become a real quagmire. For example, in Great Britain, bras, up to and including size 34B, are not subject to the VAT since it presumed that this is children’s apparel. Of course the impact of this exemption would punish the breast implant industry, or worse yet, force more well endowed women into underwear more properly worn by devotees of the Marquis De Sade.

For our sisters’, daughters’, wives’ and mothers’ sake, just say no to the VAT. Restraints on government spending are the answer, not new taxes.

Well, Damnit, I’ve had enough! I can take the insurance, the illegal aliens, the cap ‘n trade and what have you- but when you put a crimp on good ol’ American boobies I shall not be moved!