AS THE GOP goes wobbly, red states go purple, then blue. This is the cautionary tale that California offers national Republicans. Texas, it seems, is in the crosshairs next. Republicans need the Lone Star State’s 38 electoral votes to anchor any future presidential victory. Democratic strategists, knowing this, have launched “Battleground Texas,” a multi-million-dollar attempt to make the state competitive again. The effort has drawn attention from the likes of the liberal rag the American Prospect, and the unthinkable prospect of a blue Texas has even burdened a few heads on Capitol Hill. “In not too many years, Texas could switch from being all Republican to all Democrat,” Senator Ted Cruz told the New Yorker last year. “The Republican Party would cease to exist. We would become like the Whig Party.”
Writing at the Spectator online, Reid Smith compared the situation to that of Colorado, a once solidly red state, turned blue after establishment Republicans went flaky:
I thought Lillian Hellman was dead. It must be her ghost, then, that’s haunting—and writing—at History.com. How else does one explain this “This Day in History” post this week?
On October 20, 1947, the notorious Red Scare kicks into high gear in Washington, as a Congressional committee begins investigating Communist influence in one of the world's richest and most glamorous communities: Hollywood. […]
In the early days of the Industrial Revolution a number of English textile workers saw their livelihoods replaced by automated machines. Faced with joblessness, poverty, and starvation the group, calling itself the Luddites, protested by writing ballads, broadsides and, most notoriously, by destroying a few automated textile looms.
Today, the Luddites are generally seen as wrong-headed and backward technophobes, when in fact they were not anti-technology, but, in the words of Ronnie Bray, “anti-starvation.” Suffice it to say, that had automation delivered on its promise to maintain or create jobs, at least in the short term, there would have been no Luddite backlash.
The Luddites are invoked each time some Cassandra questions the wisdom of the direction of our ongoing hi-tech revolution. Such revolutions, it is believed, are good for society and economies. The old jobs may be going away, but they will be replaced by new ones.
And, indeed, for decades, our leaders have been preaching new mostly minimum wage service sector openings, while we wait for something better to come along.
Wednesday evening the Obama administration extended the deadline for getting insurance coverage and avoiding the individual mandate penalty from February 15 to the end of the open enrollment period, March 31.
Administration officials said that they were just “clarifying” the law, but that’s hard to believe. Why didn’t they clarify it a month ago, instead of three weeks into a disastrous launch of the exchanges? Just a guess, but it might have something to do with the real possibility that people would pay a fine for failing to buy something through exchanges that they could not even access.
Anyway, as someone who opposes the individual mandate as a gross encroachment on liberty, it doesn’t seem like something I should get that worked up about. Yet also at issue is the “rule of law”—namely, does President Obama have the legal authority to do this? Clearly, he doesn’t.
The explanation is technical, so bear with me.
The scariest thing about Halloween isn’t the goblins, those kids egging your house, or biting down on a sharp surprise in a Special Dark. It’s adults who impersonate children.
Halloween, a holiday for children, has transformed into an unholy day for adults; its focus has shifted from gustatory appetites to sexual ones. It doesn’t take a warlock to see that this is frightening.
Popular costumes this year include Miley Cyrus’s mouse leotard, theHunger Games huntress, and, long after its sell-by date, variations on the 50 Shades of Grey theme, which is a long way of saying that by far the most popular costume this year, and indeed for at least 10 years running, is “whore.”
The President is cooperating. He’s providing names to Enemy Central. In his Rose Garden remarks on October 21, he mentioned at least three persons of interest, all of whom were in his custody and, unlike a fourth person in similar position, Ms. Karmel Allison, did not immediately fall ill to the contagions he or his teleprompter was spreading. Theirs turn out to be names are as artsy as, if less syrupy than, Ms. Allison’s. They are Jasmine Jennings, Jessica Ugalde, and Ezra Salop (unless that’s a misspelling of Alsop, which would make our friend Ezra the scion of a most distinguished Georgetown family, prime Obamacare material). The reason for their fame? As the President announced: “they’ve been able to stay on their parents’ plans until they’re 26.” Wow.
Ted Cruz is unbowed.
The Texas Senator, speaking at The American Spectator’s annual Washington gala Wednesday evening, was nothing if not resolute in his attacks on the disaster that has become Obamacare.
“Should we have fought this fight?” he asked, his resounding yes coming by way of citing the differences between the way the disaster of Obamacare is perceived in Washington and out in the country. “If you get out of Washington there’s no ambiguity” on the question, Cruz said.
“This thing isn’t working. It is a disaster and a disaster that is hurting people right now…. On the merits Obamacare isn’t working.”
Cruz came out swinging against his GOP Establishment critics in the Senate and elsewhere, and was fearless in taking on his critics. Saying among things that when his opponents in the GOP said their disagreement with him was on “tactics” — and he asked for their tactics -- the response that came back was the sound of “crickets chirping.”