Friday, October 31, 2014

Happening now:

Dear John,

Two President's Club members were so inspired by Heritage Action's elite Sentinel activists that they issued a challenge: if you and other Heritage Foundation supporters meet our $2 million goal by 3 p.m. today, they will give another $1 million.

So far, Heritage and Heritage Action supporters like you have given nearly $1.4 million towards our $2 million President's Club Challenge.

Heritage Action is our sister organization. Their 450,000 activists and team of Washington lobbyists forced lawmakers to cut spending, limit President Obama’s tax hikes, protect the Second Amendment, and stand up time and again to fight Obamacare.

You can donate online to this challenge here.

I'm calling on you, as one of Heritage's most important supporters, to accept the challenge and bolster Heritage Action's grassroots strategy. Will you accept the challenge?

>> Accept the challenge. 

Thank you for all you do for America. With your support, we can make our conservative vision a reality.

Jim DeMint

The Heritage Foundation | 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE | Washington, D.C. 20002 | (800) 546-2843

You are subscribed to Heritage Foundation e-mails. If you want to change your e-mail preferences, please click here to update your subscription.


Obama Creates a Boulder Too Heavy for Him to Lift

The Goldberg File
By Jonah Goldberg

October 31, 2014

Dear Reader (unless you’re the kind of chickens**t who calls people “chickens**t” anonymously),

Obama fatigue is setting in. Indeed, I’ve gone from Obama fatigue through full-on Obama Epstein-Barr to end-stage Obama narcolepsy. I hear him talking, or hear some MSNBC-type rhapsodizing about how misunderstood he is, and I start dozing off like a truck driver who took the drowsy-formula Nyquil by mistake. “Gotta stay awake! This is my job!” But then 20 seconds later, Jonathan Alter starts telling me how misunderstood the president is, and suddenly orange traffic cones are bouncing off my truck’s grill as I somnolently drift into a highway work zone. You could fill a cereal bowl with broken glass and barbed-wire shards drenched in hot sauce right below my face. All it would take for me to use it as a pillow is a 30-second loop of Obama saying “Let me be clear.” His speeches are like whale sounds, but with less substance. I’d say they’re all white noise, but I don’t want to get called a racist.

This is a problem for a couple of reasons. First, as I said during that less-than-exquisite truck-driving simile, this is my job or at least one of them (I don’t need to follow Obama’s doings for my side gig as chinchilla rancher). I can’t just tune out the president of the United States for the next two years like a normal, happy, well-adjusted American might. I can’t help but feel like Donald Sutherland in Animal House complaining to his bored literature students:

Don’t write this down, but I find Milton probably as boring as you find Milton. Mrs. Milton found him boring, too. He’s a little bit long-winded, he doesn’t translate very well into our generation, and his jokes are terrible.

[Bell rings, students rise to leave]

But that doesn’t relieve you of your responsibility for this material. Now I’m waiting for reports from some of you  . . . Listen, I’m not joking. This is my job!

Hey, substitute “Obama” for “Milton” and that holds up pretty well.

This Should Be More Fun

Second, my Obama-narcolepsy is interfering with my Obama-schadenfreude. I for one find it nothing less than hilarious to watch liberal eggheads (both real and imagined), never mind Obama himself, spin elaborate theories for why Obama is not just unpopular but pretty much a failed president.

For the record, this designation “failed president” may be premature by objective and historical standards (though I don’t think it is), but his presidency is already in the books as a failure by the standards Obama set for himself. If you promise to turn water into wine and then just run out of water without providing any wine, there’s really no way to plausibly shout “Success!”

He wanted to transform America, not just via policy, but by restoring faith in government itself. He’s had some success on the former but has been a catastrophic failure on the latter, which means the policy successes aren’t nearly as secure as the Left thinks they are.

Speaking of catastrophic failure, rather than risk triggering your own Obama fatigue, watch this metaphorical recap of Obama’s attempts to transform America, as re-enacted by cats trying to jump.

It’s Not Him, It’s You

The Tyranny of Clichés: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas

What National Review is Reading

Order Today!

The Tyranny of Clichés: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas

By Jonah Goldberg

Explanations for Obama’s failures vary in their honesty and persuasiveness, of course. Mary Landrieu represents the more hackish end of the spectrum. Borrowing a line from the New York Times editorial board, Landrieu blamed it all on southern racism and sexism. In fairness, she was speaking specifically about Louisianans you know, her constituents. But she helpfully managed to throw all of the South under the bus as well. Hey, if you’re going to go down in a blaze of glory, why be stingy with the kerosene?

Of course, the problem with this theory is that Obama is unpopular across America and in at least 43 states. Even the most generous definition of “southern racist” won’t get you that far in explaining his unpopularity in Wisconsin or Michigan. Moreover, for his numbers to be so bad, it means lots of people who voted for him once or even twice must now disapprove of him. Did all of these independents and moderate Republicans wake up one morning and decide to cut some eyeholes in their pillowcases and become Klansmen?

Other explanations are similar in their desire to place blame elsewhere. The fault lies not in Obama, but in ourselves. Let’s come back to this in a moment because I know exactly what you’re thinking right now. “Gosh, isn’t it about time Jonah quoted East German Communist playwright Bertolt Brecht?”

In Die Lösung Brecht famously quipped that if the people lose faith in the government it would be better if the government dissolved the people and elected another.

For progressives it’s always five minutes to Brecht-O-Clock. What I mean is this desire to fix the people, not the government always seems to be lurking behind liberalism. It was there when Woodrow Wilson said the first job of an educator is to make your children as unlike you as possible. It was there when Obama explained in 2008 that Hillary Clinton’s Pennsylvania primary supporters weren’t ready to vote for him because they were too busy clinging to their sky god and boom sticks. It’s the central theme of Thomas Frank’s What’s the Matter with Kansas? It was whispering in John Podesta’s ear when he said the American political system “sucks.” It is at the heart of the Voxy “explanatory journalism” craze, which holds that if you call proselytizing “explaining” it will help the rubes come to their senses. It runs riot in the mainstream media and their sovereign contempt for these stupid, stupid, Americans and their parochial “unscientific” concerns about an organ-liquefying disease (even as the MSM caters to those concerns for the ratings they deliver). It runs like an underground river through the White House’s national-security policies, as they constantly downplay the dangers Islamic terrorism (“ Let’s just call it ‘work place violence’!”) for fear of rousing the fearsome beast of public opinion on the side of the war on terror. It’s why the White House doesn’t want Congress to get involved in a deal with Iran, because Congress might actually listen to the people. It’s why the New York Times laments the “bumpkinification of the midterms.”

Obama Creates a Boulder Too Heavy for Him to Lift

Anyway, back to Obama-failure explanations. Some are more structural or formal. The Constitution holds us back. The presidency is too big for any one man. We can’t have great presidents anymore. Even president Obama has come around to this point of view. Here’s Jeff Shesol in The New Yorker:

Despite the grand hopes and hype of the 2008 campaign, this tempering of ambitions, this recognition -- and acceptance -- of the constraints on Presidential power has been a leitmotif of the Obama Presidency. In an interview with David Remnick published earlier this year, Obama talked about “that business about the great-man theory of history. The President of the United States cannot remake our society, and that’s probably a good thing. Not ‘probably,’ ” he added. “It’s definitely a good thing.” Over the years, Obama and his advisors have issued a long string of statements to this effect: on foreign policy, “ leading from behind” (2011); on the limits of executive authority, “there’s no shortcut to democracy” (2013); on civil rights, we must sometimes take “a quarter of a loaf or half a loaf” (2014).

Shesol is right, but it’s worth noting Obama’s learning curve has been steep. And he’s still climbing it. By my calculations, Barack Obama should be adequately qualified for his current job around 2072. But Shesol, like so many others, let’s Obama off the hook by blaming the system, not the man.

When Obama came into office, he thought it would be different. First, he got almost everything he wanted. These were the salad days when Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid served as de facto co-presidents. Then, as it dawned on him that he couldn’t just give a speech to fix a problem, he started complaining about his relative powerlessness. Over the years, the president has let slip countless times that he wishes he had the sort of power not afforded to presidents in a democratic republic. He riffed that he was envious of the power wielded by Frank Underwood in House of Cards (“This guy’s getting a lot of stuff done,” Obama said. “I wish things were that ruthlessly efficient”). He whined that the president of China has it so much easier. Yes, because the president of China can give a speech and things will change. You know why? Because he’s a dictator.

Get the Popcorn

Anyway, as the German sadist said after he signed up for his Amazon Prime delivery of special nipple clamps, “Back to schadenfreude.”

I should be enjoying all of this more. The wheels are coming off the very same bus that Barack Obama has been throwing people under for years. And, as Maimonides noted so long ago, it is very hard to throw someone under a bus if the bus has no wheels.

Watching Obama go around insisting that he’s fine with the way his fellow Democrats are distancing themselves from him all the while backhandedly nationalizing the election has been hilarious.

Even more amusing: watching all of these Democrats insist they don’t support Obama when they were perfectly happy to be part of the president’s entourage when he was popular. Now they’re all clearing out like the disco-partiers at Navin Johnson’s house after news of the Opti-Grab class-action lawsuit breaks .

And Shesol’s point about Obama’s learning curve notwithstanding, the president still seems incapable of rhetorically conceding that he’s a political albatross. A couple of weeks after declaring in a big speech that “every single one of my policies are on the ballot” he went on Al Sharpton’s radio show. “The bottom line is, though,” he said of vulnerable Dems, “these are all folks who vote with me; they have supported my agenda in Congress,” he told the tracksuit-wrapped-carbuncle. “These are folks who are strong allies and supporters of me, and I tell them, I said, ‘You know what? You do what you need to do to win. I will be responsible for making sure our voters turn out.’”

And then he started naming specific Democrats by name, starting with Michelle Nunn.

Sometime last year, Obama said that he dreamed of going full Bullworth so he could drop truth bombs on everybody. If you never saw Bullworth, good for you. But just so you know, it was a movie starring Warren Beatty. And, like all Beatty movies of the last 20 years, he spent most of the time under special lights that only illuminated his eyes, to minimize the staggering scope of his enormous forehead and clarify for audiences that he is not in fact Ned Beatty’s skinny kid brother. But that’s not important right now. What you need to know is that Beatty played a senator who had a kind of nervous breakdown and decided to keep it real and say what he really thought.

Substantively, Obama’s been doing that already. By saying this election is about his agenda, he’s in effect the most honest politician in America, at least on this issue. Essentially, he is saying the senators distancing themselves from him are opportunistic liars and he’s right. Still, it would be more fun to see Obama go Bullworth on style, if for nothing else to see the New York Times headline: “Obama on Vulnerable Dem Candidates: ‘They All My Bitches.’”

Hillary Clinton’s ‘Gaffe’

As a member in good standing of the “Hillary Clinton Is Wildly Overrated” Club, I feel I must say a word or two about her statement the other day that businesses don’t create jobs. Of course what she said was stupid. And I am sure she and other Democrats will say such stupid things again in the future, so we don’t need to dwell on all that. The greater significance of her gaffe, however, is not its ideological import but it’s practical political meaning. She is not a very good politician. Watch the clip. She’s reading from prepared remarks. Normally, her idea of spontaneity is to leap from her prepared remarks to her prepared note cards. But, by her own account, this time she “shorthanded” her argument. And she did it really, really, really, really badly. The woman has given thousands of speeches and this is the best riff she can come up with? As I wrote last week, the idea that just because her last name is Clinton and she was lurking in the White House feeding Sid Blumenthal live rats, she’s a “Clinton Democrat” is ludicrous. Even more ludicrous is the idea that because her husband is a good politician, she is too. You could pry her husband off an intern, slap him across the face with a semi-frozen flounder, and shout “Give me a partisan liberal-populist explanation of where jobs come from, Mister!” And without batting an eye he’d spew out the perfect sound bite, before chastising you for the internus interruptus.

Various & Sundry

First, some housecleaning. In case you hadn’t heard, I am no longer an editor-at-large of National Review Online. I am now a senior editor of National Review. Much like a speech by Barack Obama, this changes almost nothing of substance. It mostly has to do with organizational changes within National Review and my desire to have a title that doesn’t elicit follow-up questions like “What is an editor-at-large?” It does mean however, that I get a vote on endorsements now and I am allowed to let the gimp out of the box when I want.

I want to congratulate the National Review Institute for an absolutely fantastic event this week in New York. We had the first annual William F. Buckley Prize dinner and it was a smashing success. I would also like to congratulate the inaugural winner of the Buckley Prize, my friend and hero Charles Krauthammer, who gave a splendid talk. I particularly enjoyed his 15-minute extemporaneous rap, though I could have used fewer F-bombs.

I also want to congratulate Jonathan Last on the publication of The Seven Deadly Virtues. My contribution to the essay collection with a few modest changes appears in the new issue of National Review. His essay on “modern virtue” is the cover story of the new issue of some magazine called The Weekly Standard. We had an event at AEI for the book. Jonathan, P. J. O’Rourke, Rob Long, James Lileks, and Christine Rosen participated. The crowd liked it but some of the humor seemed lost on them at times. I worried the audience might be cold when I introduced the event by saying, “Like Robert Reich’s inseam, I’m going to keep this short” and the crowd looked at me like I said “Crop rotation was an important innovation in the 14th century.” Anyway, you can listen to the event over at Ricochet or wait for it to appear on C-SPAN sometime soon.

You also might like to know I finished my book proposal. I think I confused some readers a few weeks ago when I wrote about this. It’s not about the “Rectification of Names” per se. But name rectification plays an important part in the larger scheme. I’m pretty excited about the project, even if I dread writing another book. If I end up writing this thing, I want to put you on notice now. This “news”letter is technically free. But I’d appreciate it if you assigned a monetary value to it. Say, a quarter for each one. In two or three years, that will probably cover the full price of my book. You can repay me by buying it. Please.

Because it’s Halloween, my column today is on monsters. I write that man is the only monster who ever existed. But this guy has me rethinking that.

Yes, the Goldberg Family will be dressing as zombies again. In years past we were a zombie flight crew, zombie cheerleaders and football players, etc. This year we’re zombie prisoners. Perhaps if you’re good there will be pictures.

By all means click on these links, but look busy when the boss comes. Hopefully you’ll look busier than this. But not as distracted as these guys.

Then again, looking busy at the office isn’t everything.

13 Facts about “Treehouse of Horror.”

And then of course, there’s this stuff.

The most googled Halloween costumes in each state

Guys, don’t try this at home. Actually, only try this at home.

Squirrel sticks its head in a pumpkin

13 real life animals lifted directly out of your nightmares

And here’s 14.

The worst places for surviving the zombie apocalypse

And if you just happen to be the author of the book “Halloween’s not my bag, baby,” some non Halloweeny links:

DC metro map to scale

Coming to an American campus near you soon: The war on sighing.

Google translate has a lot to answer for.

Cuddly Ebola toy

Dog who’s allergic to humans

Puppies chasing laser pointers

Bear found ambling through drug store aisles sent to rehab

Chart claims to show how intelligence predicts your favorite bands

Thank you, science! Having facial hair can be good for your health.

Which means these guys are immortal.

Send your nominations now!


Join the 500-plus NR Post-Election Cruisers who've signed up for a glorious week with over 3 dozen conservative all stars, including VDH, Allen West, John Yoo, Ralph Reed, Jonah, Rich, Mona, Jay, Tim Pawlenty, Fred Thompson, Jon Kyl, and many more. Click here for details.

Quick Links: Jonah's Latest Column    National Review Online     E-Mail Jonah

Save 75%... Subscribe to National Review magazine today and get 75% off the newsstand price. Click here for the print edition or here for the digital.

National Review also makes a great gift! Click here to send a full-year of NR Digital or here to send the print edition to family, friends, and fellow conservatives.

Jonah Goldberg
NR Podcasts
Forward to a Friend

National Review, Inc.

Unsubscribe or manage your National Review e-newsletters. To view our privacy policy, please click here.

This email was sent by:

National Review, Inc.
215 Lexington Avenue, 11th Floor
New York, NY 10016

It’s Come to This: Attack Ads Against the Media

National Review

Today on NRO

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: An anemic economy and sense of national decline portend a bad Election Day for Democrats. A Referendum on Competence.

JONAH GOLDBERG: In The Walking Dead, evil that emerges among the living is foreshadowed by the zombies. What Monsters Portend.

KATHERINE TIMPF: Go ahead and dress like someone from a different culture — if you want to carry on a “deadly system of oppression.” Eight Most Absurd PC Police Halloween Rules.

KEVIN D. WILLIAMSON: Doctors and patients get burned by the world’s worst middleman. Health-Care Hell.

SLIDESHOW: Cartoon of the Day: Frankenstein’s Monster.


Morning Jolt
. . . with Jim Geraghty

October 31, 2014

Elsas… Elsas everywhere! Oh my goodness, every little girl in the neighborhood just turned into Princess Elsa from Frozen!

Have a Happy Halloween.

It’s Come to This: Attack Ads Against the Media

A two-minute television ad?

Conservative War Chest unveiled its final ads of the 2014 midterm elections, with different ads running in North Carolina and New Mexico.

A new 2-minute TV ad airing in North Carolina asks voters to make the election a referendum on the “corruption of American journalism.”

“Conservatives can never gain final victory until they confront the problem of news organizations who are the real opposition party in America,” said Mike Flynn, spokesman of Conservative War Chest. “This content-heavy spot puts before the public case studies that establish these organizations as partisan not journalistic organizations that are dedicated to activism, not the fearless pursuit of the truth.”


Demote Harry Reid This Fall

Conservatives will relish every second of the ad hitting the New York Times, MSNBC, George Stephanopolous, the critics of Sharyl Attkisson, and so on. But will it change a mind, or influence the decision of a North Carolina voter who wasn’t already going to vote for Tillis? Or is this the kind of argument against the media that the Right needs to make outside the realm of blogs, articles, and so on?

Here’s the group’s explanation of the New Mexico ad buy . . .

Flynn also revealed that the Super PAC was “doubling-down” on its ad buys in the U.S. Senate race in New Mexico.

“We were the first outside group to hold U.S. Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) to account for his extreme liberal agenda and its threat to national security,” Flynn said. “Many pundits laughed that we were engaging with New Mexico voters, but since then the polls have tightened.”

“Tom Udall has spent his entire adult life in the family business of liberal politics,” Flynn said. “His family’s policies were wrong in the 1970s and they are devastatingly wrong today.”

Flynn said his group was increasing its buy behind its groundbreaking, 2-minute “Blame America First” ad, which details the national security failures of radical liberal policies like those espoused by politicians like Udall.

The group is also launching its ad highlighting the liberal “war on Hispanic dreams and values.”

Flynn said, “New Mexico has a proud Hispanic legacy stretching back generations. They understand that the liberal policies of taxes and regulations stifle dreams of economic growth. Their alliance with social issue extremists insults Hispanic values.”

As noted earlier, Allen Weh has improved his standing, but still trails significantly. New Mexico is a pretty consistently Democratic state, which is not to say that Republicans always lose in a landslide. In 2012, Heather Wilson lost the New Mexico Senate race, 51 percent to 45 percent, to Democrat Martin Heinrich. No one is going to argue that incumbent Democratic senator Tom Udall is a whirling dervish of raw political charisma, and the political environment is not good for Democrats. But there are no cases of an incumbent blowing a seven-point lead in a statewide race in the final week since 1998.

Liberalism Is a Luxury Most Americans Can’t Afford

It’s not just your imagination. Some of the country’s most liberal cities San Francisco, New York, Washington D.C., Seattle, Los Angeles -- might be nice to live in, but they have the highest costs of living.

Liberal cities seem to have the worst affordability crises, according to Trulia chief economist Jed Kolko.

In a recent article, Kolko divided the largest cities into 32 “red" metros where Romney got more votes than Obama in 2012 (e.g. Houston), 40 “light-blue” markets where Obama won by fewer than 20 points (e.g. Austin), and 28 “dark-blue” metros where Obama won by more than 20 points (e.g. L.A., SF, NYC). Although all three housing groups faced similar declines in the recession and similar bounce-backs in the recovery, affordability remains a bigger problem in the bluest cities.

"Even after adjusting for differences of income, liberal markets tend to have higher income inequality and worse affordability,” Kolko said.

Kolko's theory isn't an outlier. There is a deep literature tying liberal residents to illiberal housing policies that create affordability crunches for the middle class. In 2010, UCLA economist Matthew Kahn published a study of California cities, which found that liberal metros issued fewer new housing permits. The correlation held over time: As California cities became more liberal, he said, they built fewer homes.

"All homeowners have an incentive to stop new housing," Kahn told me, "because if developers build too many homes, prices fall, and housing is many families' main asset. But in cities with many Democrats and Green Party members, environmental concerns might also be a factor. The movement might be too eager to preserve the past."

Ah, the progressive rallying cry: “I’ve got my happy home; you poorer people go live somewhere else.”

Author Derek Thompson writes:

One could attempt tying this together into a pat story — Rich liberals prefer to cluster near historic coastal communities with high home values, where they support high taxes, rent control, and a maze of housing regulations to protect both their investment and the region's "character", altogether discouraging new housing development that’s already naturally constrained by geography . . . — but even that interpretation elides the colorful local history that often shapes housing politics.

I don’t know, is that “pat story” really so hard to believe?

Speaking of liberal cities . . .

What Everybody Sees, but Doesn’t Want to Say, about the Catcalling Video

A few observations on the catcalling video . . .

First, the obvious. Gentlemen, this is crude behavior. Don’t do it. It’s shameful, and no, she’s not going to go out with you anyway.

Second, some are objecting that the video isn’t offering an accurate depiction of harassment on the street because it isn’t sufficiently racially inclusive:

Rob Bliss, who posted the video on behalf of the anti-street-harassment group Hollaback!, told CNN that those shown were just a small sample.

"Looking at this as being some type of sample that is completely balanced, I think, is never going to be accurate," he said. "To do that, we would have had to shoot for days and days, and we didn't set out to make a long video."

Bliss, who was inspired by the experiences of his girlfriend, tracked volunteer Shoshana Roberts as she walked through the city over the course of 10 hours. The video shows her being greeted by mostly black and Latino men with calls like "Hey, baby," "Damn!" and "What's up, beautiful?" Some of the men even follow her.

Hanna Rosin objects:

We can just conclude that they caught a small slice of catcallers, and lots of other men do it, too. But if the point of this video is to teach men about the day-to-day reality of women, then this video doesn’t hit its target. The men who are sitting in their offices or in cafes watching this video will instead be able to comfortably assure themselves that they don’t have time to sit on hydrants in the middle of the day and can’t properly pronounce “mami.” They might do things to women that are worse than catcalling, but this is not their sin.

First, there are a lot of men sitting in their offices or in cafes watching this video who can indeed comfortably assure themselves that they don’t behave like this . . . because they don’t. Clearly, Rosin doesn’t want to confront the possibility that some groups of men may be more inclined to engage in this behavior than others, and wants to return to her more comfortable conclusion that all men, including those sitting in offices or cafes, are part of the problem.

But the video suggests a truth that’s self-evident but uncomfortable to those who religiously practice political correctness: Catcalling is more common from men who are sitting on fire hydrants on the sidewalk in the middle of the day than among men sitting in offices and cafes. Are we shocked that an organization that aimed to shine a spotlight on catcalling and other inappropriate behavior in public chose to record the streets of New York City? Would it have taken the same amount of time for them to gather enough video on the streets outside the Naval Academy in Annapolis, or at the Saint Vincent Archabbey, or in Pennsylvania Dutch Country, or outside the VFW hall in Peoria, Illinois? Or are we to conclude the inappropriate behavior occurs with the same frequency on every street in America and that all men are equally prone to this behavior? Are we supposed to feign shock to see how many of the men depicted appear to be homeless, unemployed, under-employed, or looking like hoodlums?

And how likely is it that any of the men who engage in this behavior will be shamed by a video of their behavior? After all, they’re already engaging in this behavior in public.

ADDENDA: A nice moment up in New Hampshire, where debate moderator WMUR's James Pindell apologizes to Scott Brown for erroneously correcting him on a geographical point.


We need your help to give Harry Reid a demotion and send Washington a message! Click here to join our effort, and spread the word to your friends! Visit today.

To read more, visit

Was this email forwarded to you? Sign up for NR's great free newsletters here.

Save 75%... Subscribe to National Review magazine today and get 75% off the newsstand price. Click here for the print edition or here for the digital.

National Review also makes a great gift! Click here to send a full-year of NR Digital or here to send the print edition to family, friends, and fellow conservatives.

NR Podcasts
Forward to a Friend

National Review, Inc.

Founders' Son: A Life of Abraham Lincoln

What National Review is Reading

Order Today!

Founders' Son: A Life of Abraham Lincoln

By Richard Brookhiser


Manage your National Review subscriptions. We respect your right to privacy. View our policy.

This email was sent by:

National Review, Inc.
215 Lexington Avenue, 11th Floor
New York, NY 10016

Exclusive: Rand Paul Says Obama Thinks He Can 'Act Like a King'

The Daily Signal
October 31, 2014

Morning Bell

Exclusive: Rand Paul Says Obama Thinks He Can 'Act Like a King'

In an exclusive interview with The Daily Signal, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., answers our questions about immigration, religious liberty, Ebola and the fallout in Ferguson, Mo.

Watch the Interview

Attkisson: US Officials Allowed Grenade Trafficker to Operate Unfettered, Endangering Lives

Daily Signal senior independent contributor Sharyl Attkisson details a long-awaited report from the Department of Justice's inspector general.

Read More

The 7 Scariest Uses of Your Tax Money in 2014

In the spirit of Halloween, our new video looks at some of the frightening ways your tax dollars were spent this year.

Watch the Video

Quick Hits:

Heritage Logo

Facebook Link Twitter Link Google Plus Link LinkedIn YouTube

214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
Washington, DC 20002
(800) 546-2843

Donate to The Heritage Foundation

Add to your address book to ensure that you receive emails from us.

You are subscribed to Heritage Foundation e-mails as If you want to change your e-mail preferences, please click here to update your subscription.


Thursday, October 30, 2014

Your 24-hour, $2 million challenge

Dear John,

During today’s President’s Club Meeting, we shared how Heritage Action’s 9,200 grassroots Sentinels across the country are organizing in key Congressional districts to fight and win political battles on behalf of our shared principles.

Two anonymous donors were so inspired that they surprised me with an exciting proposition: they will give one million dollars to Heritage Action for America to win conservative victories — on the condition that you and other Heritage supporters contribute a combined two million dollars by 3:00 p.m. Eastern tomorrow, October 31.

Please help meet this two-million-dollar challenge by giving your most generous gift online right now.

Thank you for all you do for America. Conservatives have a major opportunity in the coming two years, and with your support we can make our conservative vision a reality.

Jim DeMint

The Heritage Foundation | 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE | Washington, D.C. 20002 | (800) 546-2843

You are subscribed to Heritage Foundation e-mails. If you want to change your e-mail preferences, please click here to update your subscription.


Hey, Who’s Going to the Ebola Nurse’s Halloween Party on Friday Night?

Today on NRO

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: Facts now pale in comparison with the higher truths of progressivism. Our Make-It-Up World.

KEVIN D. WILLIAMSON: The case for the six-figure shoeshine artist. Shine On.

JILLIAN KAY MELCHIOR: A White House electrician ran up a $1,550 bill on personal calls — and taxpayers covered the costs. Hold the Phone.

CONRAD BLACK: Tell the Turks to stop supporting terrorism — or get out of NATO. Get Tough with Turkey.

SLIDESHOW: The War of the Worlds.

Morning Jolt
. . . with Jim Geraghty

October 30, 2014

Hey, Who’s Going to the Ebola Nurse’s Halloween Party on Friday Night?

What a peach, huh?

Not long ago, Kaci Hickox was fighting Ebola in West Africa, doing what she could to treat those with the deadly disease. Now, she's in the middle of a different fight — this time, in Maine.

Maine health commissioner Mary Mayhew said late Wednesday afternoon that, even as it continues talks with Hickox's representatives, the state is in the process of filing a court order to require the nurse to abide by a 21-day quarantine. Mayhew cited concerns about Hickox's hands-on role in dealing with Ebola patients, as well as "concerns about the lack of reliability and the lack of trustworthiness in the information that has been received."

"You need to be able to have trust and credibility in that information," the state health commissioner said. "That makes her a higher risk."


Better than ObamaCare

Doctor teaches U.S. seniors controversial (yet legal) way to get $1,000s of extra dollars from the government. Learn how here.

Mayhew’s got a point here. We have a pattern of patients not being honest and upfront about their exposure to their disease and their actions after exposure. Thomas Eric Duncan lied. Dr. Nancy Snyderman broke quarantine to go out for some soup. Dr. Craig Spencer lied about how much he traveled the city.

Didn’t anybody watch House?

Back to Maine:

The health commissioner said she "did not understand" why Hickox is challenging what she calls a "common-sense approach" of staying home for three weeks. (That amount of time is significant because it may take that long between when a person gets Ebola and shows signs of it.)

"I don't plan on sticking to the guidelines," she said Wednesday on NBC's "Today" show, referring to Maine' officials' plan for her to remain quarantined at home through November 10. "I remain appalled by these home quarantine policies that have been forced upon me."

Then, Wednesday night:

"I remain really concerned by these mandatory quarantine policies for aid workers. I think we are only adding to the stigmatization that again is not based on science or evidence and if these restrictions are not removed from me from the State of Maine by tomorrow morning, Thursday morning, I will go to court to obtain my freedom," Hickox said.

Good luck, judge! Somehow, I suspect the judge will not ask her to approach the bench.

Ma’am . . . get in the farshtunkin tent.

I understand it’s quite inconvenient to have to stay home and minimize your interaction with people for a three-week period. But it’s less inconvenient than giving other people Ebola. See, your ability to live your life “normally” with access to bowling and your favorite soup and all that stuff is a high priority to you, but it’s not a particularly high priority to most of the rest of us. Not getting Ebola is an extremely high priority to the rest of us. If she’s right, and she doesn’t have Ebola, we’ve forced her to waste three weeks of her life. If she’s wrong, and she has Ebola, she runs the risk of exposing other people to it. The scenario that includes her sitting around bored for three weeks for no good reason has the advantage of no one enduring liquefying internal organs.

Lest I be accused of fear-mongering, note I’m writing this in New York City and next Tuesday I’ll travel to Dallas for The Blaze’s Election Night coverage. From one hot zone to another!

Hillary, Too Busy Posing for Vogue to Tape Ads for Vulnerable Democrats

There are a lot of reasons why Hillary Clinton is more vulnerable than the conventional wisdom thinks — although I suppose the conventional wisdom might be catching up.

Bloomberg News observes:

Though she's traveled the country for Democrats, headlining rallies from Colorado to North Carolina, Clinton has not lent any of her star power to any televised campaign ads. It's a strange discrepancy: While Clinton is one of — if not the most — requested surrogates for Democratic congressional campaigns, many seem far less seem eager to put her in their television ads.

Even the spot for Grimes, a long-time family friend of the Clintons, was online-only—a far less expensive proposition for a campaign than actually buying time to place an ad on television. And it used footage captured two weeks ago at a rally Clinton held for Grimes in Louisville, rather than any new video... 

Hillary Clinton's spokespeople refused to comment on her ad appearances, or lack of them. But people close to the former first couple say they've been turning down requests from candidates to star in ads, fearing that if they cut a spot for one, they'd have to do them for everyone who asked. Those people say former President Bill Clinton is annoyed by several unauthorized usages of his image in ads.

So what is Hillary doing with her time these days, instead of cutting ads?

Is Hillary Clinton about to make her return to the cover of Vogue? Confidenti@l has learned that the presumed presidential candidate and Vogue editor-in-chief Anna Wintour visited Michael Kors’ studio for a fitting. We’re told the power trio huddled in Kors’ office at his Bryant Park HQ, studying a “rack of clothes.” Clinton (l.), who was with longtime aide Huma Abedin and a person our spy describes as a “huge bodyguard,” has graced the cover of the fashion bible once before. She was on the December 1998 cover, in velvet Oscar de la Renta, as First Lady in a shoot by Annie Leibovitz. Last year at an opening for a de la Renta retrospective at the Clinton Presidential Center in Little Rock, Ark., Wintour said, “All of us at Vogue look forward to putting on the cover the first female President of the United States.”

Democrats are on the verge of an awful midterm election, gobs of Democrats are hanging on by their fingernails, and Hillary’s getting ready to pose for Vogue. If you’re one of those dedicated, door-knocking, flyer-distributing rank-and-file grassroots Democrats, how does it feel to have a front-running nominee who’s less dedicated to electing members of your party than you are?

Like the giant speaking fees (for Chelsea, too!), the gargantuan wealth built during a life in “public service”, the backslapping deals at the Clinton Foundation, these little anecdotes add to the narrative that the Clintons are dedicated first and foremost to “Clintons Inc.” and to others — even political allies — second.

What’s working for Hillary this coming cycle is that it’s hard to see any of her potential rivals turning into the next Barack Obama. Even if there’s an argument to be made to Democratic presidential primary voters that Hillary is too old, too establishment, too tied to Washington, too tied to the Obama administration’s failures, not sufficiently connected of the party’s vengeful populist id the way Elizabeth Warren is… who, other than Warren, could come along and play Obama next year? Martin O’Malley? Brian Schweitzer? Joe Biden? Come on.

How Significant Is It that Democrats Are Worried About These House Races?

Recall yesterday’s competitive House race roundup and note that the Associated Press confirms that Democrats are increasingly nervous about seats they never thought they would have to defend:

Desperate Democrats are rushing to save suddenly vulnerable House incumbents, even in states where President Barack Obama cruised to double-digit victories, amid fresh signs of Republican momentum less than a week before the midterm elections.

The once friendly terrain of New York, California, Obama's native state of Hawaii and adopted state of Illinois all now pose stiff challenges to Democrats who are determined to limit their losses next Tuesday. Both parties agree the GOP will hold its House majority; the question is whether Republicans can gain enough seats to rival their post-World War II high water mark of 246.

In one sign of Democratic concern, Vice President Joe Biden was heading to Massachusetts on Wednesday for a rally with Seth Moulton, who is trying to hold onto a Democratic seat against Republican Richard Tisei. Then Biden was traveling to California on Saturday to campaign in an open-seat contest east of Los Angeles that surprisingly looks closer than a sure-fire Democratic gain.

Think about it -- we’re a week away from Election Day, and the White House is sending Biden to Massachusetts.

The committee also reserved $360,000 in air time for ads for first-term Rep. Steven Horsford in his central Nevada district north of Las Vegas after the Karl Rove-founded group Crossroads GPS made a late ad buy of $935,000.

The good news is Democrats apparently forgot to get out the vote this year in Nevada. The bad news is if they lose as bad as the current outlook suggests, they probably won’t ever forget to do that again.

And In Hawaii, the Democrats are spending $200,000 on television ads and voter outreach for Mark Takai, who is locked in a tight race with former Republican Rep. Charles Djou in an open Honolulu-based district that Obama won with 70 percent of the vote.

In one example, the Democratic committee has bought $99,000 in radio ads for eight-term Rep. Lois Capps in her Santa Barbara-area race against Chris Mitchum, the son of the late actor Robert Mitchum. The GOP candidate has relatively little money still on hand for his campaign — $96,108 — but the contest is considered close.

ADDENDA: A wonderful night in New York City Wednesday, as the National Review Institute held the first annual William F. Buckley Jr. Prize Dinner, honoring the DeVos family with the Buckley Prize for Leadership in Supporting Liberty, and Charles Krauthammer with the Buckley Prize for Leadership in Political Thought. In case you’re unfamiliar with it, the NRI is a nonprofit institution devoted to “policy development, public education, and advocacy that would advance the principles William F. Buckley championed.” (It’s the deliberate nonprofit, in contrast to the rest of us.)

You know how we know Charles Krauthammer is dedicated to the vision of Buckley and National Review? He attended his awards dinner on the night of Game Seven of the World Series. That’s devotion!

This week’s edition of the Jim and Mickey Show involves no politics — all Halloween talk, from how to handle awkward costume pictures on social media, speculation about the existence of ghosts, Halloween apps to find the houses with the best candy, bad dates, and romantic encounters gone terribly wrong.

From Our Sponsor:

Get the latest news at

Founders' Son: A Life of Abraham Lincoln

What National Review is Reading

Order Today!

Founders' Son: A Life of Abraham Lincoln

By Richard Brookhiser

Manage your National Review subscriptions. We respect your right to privacy. View our policy.

This email was sent by:

National Review, Inc.
215 Lexington Avenue, 11th Floor
New York, NY 10016