Which may explain why their municipal budget needs CPR:
Hat-tip: Maggie’s Farm.
"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler
Which may explain why their municipal budget needs CPR:
Hat-tip: Maggie’s Farm.
OK, the headline is totally misleading, because we don’t yet know who dumped whom:
Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and his wife, Maria Shriver, have separated, with Shriver moving out of their Brentwood mansion while the two determine the next step in their 25-year marriage.
Shriver has been residing apart from the actor-turned-politician for the last few weeks. The former first couple confirmed the separation in a joint statement released Monday after questions were raised by The Times.
“This has been a time of great personal and professional transition for each of us,” the statement read. “After a great deal of thought, reflection, discussion and prayer, we came to this decision together. At this time, we are living apart while we work on the future of our relationship.
“We are continuing to parent our four children together. They are the light and the center of both of our lives.” We consider this a private matter and neither we nor any of our friends or family will have further comment. “We ask for compassion and respect from the media and the public.”
Rumors that Arnold is going to be hanging out with Charlie Sheen and a half-dozen porn “goddesses” could not be confirmed . . .
UPDATE: Now a Memeorandum thread, and of course this video clip is absolutely obligatory:
One of my favorite subjects is the inexorable logic of “social justice.” I have suffered many slings and arrows (hello, Little Miss Attila) for arguing that once you embrace equality as a principle, this principle must inevitably lead you places you had not originally intended to go:
Lyralisa Stevens, who was born male but lives as a female, is serving 50 years to life in a California prison for killing a San Bernardino County woman with a shotgun in a dispute over clothes.
Stevens is one of more than 300 inmates in the state prison system diagnosed with Gender Identity Disorder, a psychiatric condition addressed in free society with hormone replacement therapy and, in some cases, sex reassignment surgery.
Prison officials have provided female hormones for Stevens since her incarceration in 2003. But now she is asking the 1st District Court of Appeal in San Francisco to require the state to pay for a sex-change operation. . . .
A ruling in Stevens’ favor would make California the first place in the country required to provide reassignment surgery for an inmate, according to lawyers for the receiver appointed to oversee California’s troubled prison health system. They argue that the state should be required to provide only “minimally adequate care,” not sex-change operations that cost $15,000 to $50,000.
(Hat-tip: Weasel Zippers.) To believe that a convicted murderer has a right to sex-change treatment at taxpayer expense, you must have first traveled a long way down the slippery slope of egalitarian social-justice logic. But having traveled this far (and let’s face it, California has been sliding in that direction for decades), how can you refuse to grant this latest demand? Once this demand is granted, something further will be demanded, because until you reach the Utopia of perfect equality, there will always be some injustice to form the basis of new grievances.
And so there is never an end to it because, as F.A. Hayek explained, “social justice” is a mirage.
A 42-year-old paramedic is hospitalized with critical head injuries after he was savagely stomped in the parking lot while leaving a Dodgers-Giants game last week. The injured man, a father of two young children, is a Giants fan and the Los Angeles Times depicts this atrocity as a sports-rivalry-gone-wrong. But Southern California blogger Donald Douglas headlines it differently:
Hispanics Suspected in Savage Beating
of Giants Fan at Dodgers’ Opening Day
That headline elicited raised eyebrows from Doug Mataconis, who asked on Twitter: “Why is it relevant what race they are?” While I suppose Dr. Douglas can explain this himself, let me suggest two possibilities:
So if political correctness forbids the L.A.-area media from mentioning that the suspects are Hispanic, could this be part of the problem? There were 72 arrests reported at Opening Day at Dodger Stadium and if it is the case (as Dr. Douglas seems to suggest) that Hispanics are disproportionately represented among the troublemakers, why the fearful need to tiptoe around that fact?
But ask yourself this: What if a black fan had been beaten half to death by two white men outside Dodger Stadium? Would a potential ethnic factor in such a crime be ignored or dismissed by the media?
Furthermore, given the fact that Los Angeles is about a three-hour drive from the Mexican border, and that Hispanic criminals in Southern California sometimes flee to Mexico, wouldn’t such a crime tend to highlight certain public-safety aspects of U.S. immigration policy?
All of this, you understand, is posited hypothetically, because it is impossible to know from the media accounts whether the suspects were Hispanic or not. However, Dr. Douglas says: “Don’t be surprised if we find out that the suspects are MS-13 operatives.” And we do have this description:
The attackers are believed to be between the ages of 18-25 and have shaved heads and thin mustaches.
One had a goatee, and the other had tattoos on his neck.
The “tattoos on his neck” description might indeed indicate gang affiliation, or these two might just be a couple of young baseball fans who got too drunk during the game. But if it weren’t for the MSM’s long, sad history of politcally correctness, perhaps Dr. Douglas would not need to be so suspicious. And if he is proven right, it will be the media coverage — and not his suspicions — which require an explanation.
Welcome to the 21st century, where parents have more reasons than ever to worry about their kids:
MODESTO — A Modesto bar could face fines and loss of its liquor license after police say they found underage pole dancers and drinkers along with other illegal activity at the establishment.
Acting on complaints, police and officers with the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control raided Los Limones bar at 241 S. Seventh St. on [March 11] . . .
There were five pole dancers in all, and officers called the parents of those who were underage, [police spokesman Sgt. Rick] Armendariz said. The two, described as being in their teens, had told their parents they were at a sleepover. . . .
Arrested were Abel Rodriguez, 35, and Alicia Moran, 41, both of Modesto.
Rodriguez was charged with a parole violation and resisting arrest. Moran was arrested on suspicion of possessing narcotics and providing a false name to officers.
A security guard was cited for furnishing liquor to minors or allowing them to drink inside the bar. Two girls younger than 18 were cited for being in the bar, and a third girl younger than 18 was cited for consuming alcohol . . .
Via KTXL-TV, we learn that the youngest of the jailbait pole-dancers were 17, but concerned parents everywhere will breathe a sigh of relief to learn that the girls weren’t actually naked: “They were found dancing for customers while wearing lingerie.”
Nothing to worry about there, Mom and Dad: Just your 17-year-old daughter in lingerie shaking her moneymaker for bar customers.
Stop being so uptight. Mellow out. It’s California!
In case you missed it, hate-filled HBO “star” Bill Maher one-upped his own most tasteless anti-Palin slurs:
Question: Has Mitt Romney ever spoken out forcefully in Gov. Palin’s defense? Because some people have noticed the crickets chirping:
Joseph Fein, a party insider from the Los Angeles area, said some people feel they can’t trust Romney.
“Where was he when Michael Steele was being attacked?” Fein said. “Where was he when Sarah Palin was attacked? Romney not standing up was noticed.”
That’s from a Politico story about the notable paucity of 2012 contenders at the California GOP convention, and that quote is from our buddy at the Valley of the Shadow blog, who covered the convention all weekend.
“After LA lost the aerospace industry during the Clinton Administration, we lost a half million aerospace workers, voters and donors.”
— former California GOP Chairman Shawn Steel
That quote reminded me of the 1993 movie Falling Down starring Michael Douglas as a laid-off Los Angeles aerospace engineer trying to make sense of a world falling apart. And it seems to me that the California Republican Party’s response to its 15-year decline has been scarcely less counter-productive than Douglas’s actions in that movie.
More from Joe Fein’s interview with Sean Steel:
The first question was: How to win Los Angeles in 2012?
Mr. Steel answered by saying, “The formula for winning Los Angeles is 60% Asian, 40% Latino and 55% Caucasians,” He continued, “When we battle, we [in RPLAC and CAGOP] must use the 40 – 55- 60 rule.”
Really? I mean, really? Instead of talking issues, message, organizing and campaign strategy, the first thing that pops into your mind when you’re asked about a plan for victory is demographics? And please explain how you think the GOP is going to get 60% of the Asian vote or 40% of the Hispanic vote when it can only get 55% of the white vote?
When I visited California I was struck by the fatalism of the state’s Republican officials, who simply write off most Democrat-held districts as unwinnable and passively accept the idea that huge swaths of the electorate are immune to GOP appeals.
Go read the rest of Joe’s coverage of this weekend’s California GOP convention. Maybe there’ll be some glimmer of hope.
Or else conservatives everywhere can get an object lesson in how not to run a Republican Party.
by Smitty
Stacy was disgruntled, I gather, that the Koch brothers didn’t decide to send him to California Republican Spring Convention. But we do have the Valley of the Shadow on scene, providing an effort worthy of your attention, albeit slightly less gonzo.
The economic train wreck that is California promises to be important and riveting viewing.
Interesting times.
Also attending the gathering: The ‘Stache. The man behind the facial follicles is neither pleased with the current US policy on Libya, no ruling out a run for the Republican Presidential nomination:
. . .John Bolton continued to criticize Pres. Barack Obama’s handling of the explosive situation in Libya, as well as creating some fireworks of his own by throwing the door wide-open to speculation about a possible run for the White House in 2012.
When asked directly about a bid for the presidency, the Bush-era diplomat and foreign policy expert said that though he does not have a timeline for making a decisions, he “is considering” it. Bolton laid out his reasons for believing that a late entry into the contest–one that he characterized as having no clear leader at this early stage–did not disadvantage any chances to snag the Republican nomination.
It remains to be seen whether American disdain for a foreign policy seemingly crafted in the Land of ‘Punt’ would draw more attention to The ‘Stache’s vigorous approach, when Americans typically vote their wallets. In other words, can Bolton make a convincing domestic policy case alongside his overseas chops?
Hopefully VotS can score an interview.