Privatize Airport Security « Commentary Magazine

Rather than use sequestration to trim waste, the Obama administration has viewed the deadline—and the Republican desire to curtail spending—as an assault on big government. If it’s a choice between defending big government and hurting the individual, President Obama appears much more inclined to punish the individual, hoping that a backlash against government-instigated inconvenience will lead Republicans to cave.

via Privatize Airport Security « Commentary Magazine.

FDA Crushing Pharmaceutical Growth | Via Meadia

Government regulation is stifling America’s vibrant pharmaceutical industry. A recent report by the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology estimates that it costs an average of $1.2 billion to win FDA approval and bring a new drug to market. Given that biopharmaceuticals account for roughly two percent of the economy, this is no small matter.

The chief problem is the complex process of clinical trials, in particular “Phase 3,” in which a drug is tested and retested to prove its its effectiveness in treating conditions across a broad population. These trials have a strong track record, but they are poorly suited to new biopharmaceuticals, which are often very effective in smaller, targeted groups despite a lower success rate in the public at large. Under the current system, many of these drugs may fail their trials despite their effectiveness when prescribed correctly.

via FDA Crushing Pharmaceutical Growth | Via Meadia.

Kathleen Parker: The Obama White House ‘threat’ to Bob Woodward matters – The Washington Post

Woodward, almost 70, is Washington’s Reporter Emeritus. His facts stand up to scrutiny. His motivations withstand the test of objectivity. Sperling obviously assumed that Woodward wouldn’t take offense at the suggestion that he not only was wrong but was also endangering his valuable proximity to power.

He assumed, in other words, that Woodward would not do his job. This was an oversight.

This is no tempest in a teapot but rather the leak in the dike. Drip by drip, the Obama administration has demonstrated its intolerance for dissent and its contempt for any who stray from the White House script. Yes, all administrations are sensitive to criticism, and all push back when such criticism is deemed unfair or inaccurate. But no president since Richard Nixon has demonstrated such overt contempt for the messenger. And, thanks to technological advances in social media, Obama has been able to bypass traditional watchdogs as no other president has.

via Kathleen Parker: The Obama White House ‘threat’ to Bob Woodward matters – The Washington Post.

Bob Woodward: Obama’s sequester deal-changer – The Washington Post

The finger-pointing began during the third presidential debate last fall, on Oct. 22, when President Obama blamed Congress. “The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed,” Obama said. “It is something that Congress has proposed.”The White House chief of staff at the time, Jack Lew, who had been budget director during the negotiations that set up the sequester in 2011, backed up the president two days later.“There was an insistence on the part of Republicans in Congress for there to be some automatic trigger,” Lew said while campaigning in Florida. It “was very much rooted in the Republican congressional insistence that there be an automatic measure.”The president and Lew had this wrong. My extensive reporting for my book “The Price of Politics” shows that the automatic spending cuts were initiated by the White House and were the brainchild of Lew and White House congressional relations chief Rob Nabors — probably the foremost experts on budget issues in the senior ranks of the federal government.Obama personally approved of the plan for Lew and Nabors to propose the sequester to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid D-Nev.. They did so at 2:30 p.m. July 27, 2011, according to interviews with two senior White House aides who were directly involved.Nabors has told others that they checked with the president before going to see Reid. A mandatory sequester was the only action-forcing mechanism they could devise. Nabors has said, “We didn’t actually think it would be that hard to convince them” — Reid and the Republicans — to adopt the sequester. “It really was the only thing we had. There was not a lot of other options left on the table.”A majority of Republicans did vote for the Budget Control Act that summer, which included the sequester. Key Republican staffers said they didn’t even initially know what a sequester was — because the concept stemmed from the budget wars of the 1980s, when they were not in government.

via Bob Woodward: Obama’s sequester deal-changer – The Washington Post.

U.S. Capitol official: Obama wrong on janitors’ pay cut – CBS News

The president’s mention prompted Carlos Elias, the superintendent of the U.S. Capitol building and the Capitol Visitors Center, to email his employees within hours of Mr. Obama’s comment.

“The pay and benefits of EACH of our employees WILL NOT be impacted,” Elias wrote.

“There was a specific mention in the news today by a high ranking official that said ‘The employees that clean and maintain the US Capitol will receive a cut in pay’ (not specific quote but very close to it),” Elias continued.

“This is NOT TRUE,” wrote Elias. “Therefore, I request that you please notify all of our employees about the importance of ignoring media reports.”

via U.S. Capitol official: Obama wrong on janitors’ pay cut – CBS News.

Woodward’s Apostasy by Harry Stein – City Journal

Bob Woodward’s charge that he was threatened by a high-ranking Obama administration official after publishing a column critical of the White House was, it turns out, at least somewhat exaggerated. But it’s no accident that the media has chosen to focus on Woodward’s characterization of his exchange with White House economic director Gene Sperling, while all but ignoring the essence of the column that touched off the brouhaha in the first place: that Obama’s claims about Republican responsibility for the looming sequester were false, and that it was “months of White House dissembling” that had “eroded any semblance of trust between Obama and congressional Republicans.”

Indeed, the media treatment of the episode provides an all-too-telling glimpse into the administration’s relationship with the press. It hardly bears repeating that from the start of Barack Obama’s career on the national stage, he has enjoyed an unprecedented kinship with the media—one that, as frustrated opponents rightly observe, often seems indistinguishable from outright alliance. On contentious issues like those involving the budget, especially, the administration has been hugely dependent on a compliant press—not only to shore up public support for its ongoing campaign of class warfare, but also to marginalize competing arguments.

via Woodward’s Apostasy by Harry Stein – City Journal.

North Korean fashion women are ‘encouraged’ to choose from 18 officially sanctioned hairstyles | Mail Online

Why does this make me think of Michael Bloomberg?

Back in 2005, North Korean state TV launched a five part series entitled ‘Let us trim our hair in accordance with Socialist lifestyle’ with the aim of promoting short back and sides for its male population.

At the same time, a number of reports appeared in North Korean press and radio urging tidy hairstyles and appropriate clothing.

The TV show sent out teams with hidden cameras to catch ‘rebel’ North Koreans who were breaking the North Korean strict hairstyle code.

The makers of the program went so far as to name and shame those who had the audacity to get their hair cut differently.

The program even claimed there were health reasons not to grow long hair including the bizarre claim that long hair would rob the brain of energy.

Men should keep their hair shorter than five centimeters and have it cut every 15 days.

via North Korean fashion women are ‘encouraged’ to choose from 18 officially sanctioned hairstyles | Mail Online.

Debunking Obama’s Phony Claim That Sequester Cuts Will Cause Flight Delays – Investors.com

Back in 2000, the FAA handled 23% more air traffic with fewer flight controllers than it employs today, according to the Department of Transportation’s own inspector general, who added this raises “questions about the efficiency of FAA’s current controller workforce.”

Either air traffic controllers have gotten far less efficient over the past 13 years, or the FAA could get by with about 3,400 fewer of them — without affecting the quality of air travel one bit. Cutting out those excess controllers would get LaHood more than halfway to the $600 million he has to cut from the FAA’s budget.

And while LaHood ominously talks about closing 100 control towers, what he doesn’t say is that these towers should have been closed long ago.

In fact, Bloomberg News reports the FAA itself identified more than 100 “zombie towers” that handle so few flights they should be cut back or closed.

Then there’s the fact the administration has more flexibility in dealing with the sequester cuts than LaHood, or anyone else working for Obama, is willing to admit.

As the fact-checking site PolitiFact.com points out, “within the specific programs targeted for cuts, federal managers have a fair amount of discretion about what to reduce.”

via Debunking Obama’s Phony Claim That Sequester Cuts Will Cause Flight Delays – Investors.com.

Nikki Haley slams Washington after meeting with Obama | The Ticket – Yahoo! News

“I could not be more frustrated than I am right now,” Haley told reporters after the meeting. She said that when she asked Obama if he would consider a last-minute plan to shave about 2 percent from the annual federal budget without increasing taxes, the answer was “no.”

“My kids could go and find $83 billion out of a $4 trillion budget,” Haley said. “This is not rocket science.”

via Nikki Haley slams Washington after meeting with Obama | The Ticket – Yahoo! News.

Washington AWB “Accidentally” Includes House Searches | The Truth About Guns

I don’t own any weapons that would qualify under this bill (at the moment), but I think this is tyrannical on its face.

“In order to continue to possess an assault weapon that was legally possessed on the effective date of this section, the person possessing shall … safely and securely store the assault weapon. The sheriff of the county may, no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to ensure compliance with this subsection.” That’s an excerpt from Washington State Senate Bill 5737. Translation: county sheriffs can knock on the doors of homes with registered “assault weapons,” enter (without a warrant) and make sure they’re “secure.”

via Washington AWB “Accidentally” Includes House Searches | The Truth About Guns.