John Stossel urges us not to learn the wrong lessons from Thanksgiving:

When the Pilgrims first settled the Plymouth Colony, they organized their farm economy along communal lines. The goal was to share everything equally, work and produce.

They nearly all starved.

Why? When people can get the same return with a small amount of effort as with a large amount, most people will make little effort. Plymouth settlers faked illness rather than working the common property. Some even stole, despite their Puritan convictions. Total production was too meager to support the population, and famine resulted. Some ate rats, dogs, horses and cats. This went on for two years.

[Later], the people of Plymouth moved from socialism to private farming. The results were dramatic.

"This had very good success," Bradford wrote, "for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been. ... By this time harvest was come, and instead of famine, now God gave them plenty, and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many. ... "

Because of the change, the first Thanksgiving could be held in November 1623.

What Plymouth suffered under communalism was what economists today call the tragedy of the commons. But the problem has been known since ancient Greece. As Aristotle noted, "That which is common to the greatest number has the least care bestowed upon it."

When action is divorced from consequences, no one is happy with the ultimate outcome. If individuals can take from a common pot regardless of how much they put in it, each person has an incentive to be a free rider, to do as little as possible and take as much as possible because what one fails to take will be taken by someone else. Soon, the pot is empty and will not be refilled -- a bad situation even for the earlier takers.

Reminds me of the old Onion article: Marxists' Apartment A Microcosm Of Why Marxism Doesn't Work

You might think that the Writer's Strike is all Rush Limbaugh's fault.  But here are a couple writers from the Daily Show making a very compelling case as to why they deserve compensation when their content is used online.  And I have to say, I think they're right.  It's clearly a double standard.

Much has been made recently about the debate between Clinton and Obama about who has more foreign policy and governing experience: a former first-lady on her second Senate term, or a first-term Senator who once lived overseas.  Of course, the closest either has to executive experience is sharing a house with a former President.  As always, Scrappleface puts it in perspective and shows the true depth of their experience:

"In the White House, First Lady Clinton worked side-by-side with Vice President Al Gore, who I defeated in 2000," said Mr. Bush, "In the Senate, she served alongside John Kerry and John Edwards, who I defeated in 2004. No one else in the race has such broad-ranging experience with what it means to be a Democrat presidential candidate in the 21st century."

The president noted that "the very fact that Sen. Clinton is now debating with rookie Sen. Barack Obama over who has more experience serving in an executive position, which neither senator has ever done, further demonstrates that among Democrats she's seasoned, prime beef. As my friends in the ranching business say, 'It's what's for dinner'."

From Amazon's Al Dente blog:

Serendipity 3 (menu) in, of course, Manhattan, has set the Guinness World Record for most expensive dessert at $25,000.  Most of the cost is in the dish, though.  The dessert is called the "Frrrozen Haute Chocolate" and includes "a slushy mix of cocoas from 14 countries, 5 grams of 24-carat gold, whipped cream, and shavings from a luxury truffle" and is served in a dish with 1 carat of diamonds and a golden spoon.

Trouble is they were shut down earlier this month for health code violations after finding "a live mouse, mouse droppings, flies, and dozens of live cockroaches".

That last video reminded me of this one that I meant to post a while back.

Sorry I haven't felt much like posting recently.  After much hand wringing and worry it turns out I have costochondritis.  Yes, all the symptoms of a heart attack, but none of the actual danger.  Feeling better now, though, and I have a big stack of stuff saved up.  I've been using a new add-on, MyStickies, that lets me flag webpages with a comment and tags.  It's good for organizing and remembering why I wanted to comment on something in the first place.  It's also been great for remembering Christmas ideas.

Whooooooooooooo!  That is all.

Someone has built their home theater system in the style of the TNG Enterprise and the result is just the coolest thing that has ever existed.  It includes the theater, a bar area, and a sitting area.  Technically-speaking, the theater also boasts automatic doors with sound (for that authentic touch), a red alert button, and over 3800 DVDs stored on hard drives spanning 8 servers.

But, this is nothing without pictures:

Still working on my review of the debate last week.  Since then, though, all six of the "undecided voters" that CNN chose to ask questions have been identified and, to no one's surprise, they are all involved with the Democratic Party or are political activists.  Not that there's anything wrong with that -- it is a Democratic primary debate, of course.  But the fact is that they were not represented as "undecided Democratic activists" or even "undecided Democrats".  CNN wanted us to believe that these people were ordinary, random citizens just yanked from UNLV and the surrounding area.  Don't believe me?  Can't bear to give up the CNN Kool-Aid.  Fine:

First they accuse him of being a cross dresser and then they have Mo Rocca make fun of how he talks.  A brief excerpt:

MO ROCCA: When we select a president, we're not just electing an executive to do a job. We're electing a person to represent us, which is why in these marathon campaigns, we start to look at personality traits. It can be Hillary Clinton's laugh, George Bush's smirk back in 2000. Or now for me, it's Rudy Giuliani lisp. I'm a little biased here because I have a lisp, too, which is why I went to a speech therapist to sound it out.

Is America ready for a president with a lisp? Rudy Giuliani has a lisp. Full disclosure. I have a lisp. Disclosure.

MO ROCCA: If a lisp also connotes weakness, is that something that can be a detriment to someone who's trying to become the leader of the free world?

Says the WSJ:

It is unimaginable that a mainstream network would give this sort of treatment to, say, Barney Frank or John Edwards. We're not going to feign outrage again; the truth is that we find this all sort of amusing. But it is a reminder of just what a sham left-wing political correctness is. People who claim to oppose "homophobia" or other forms of prejudice often turn out merely to want a monopoly on it.

Indeed.

Says the doctor: "I'm not very good at seeing the sex."  So we know nothing yet.  Next appointment is 12/5 so hopefully we'll know then.  Still, most importantly, babies and mother are just fine.

Mike Huckabee has a new ad out capitalizing on the Chuck Norris Facts internet meme that was popular a while back (but isn't really anymore).  So I'm not sure if it's kind of out-of-touch or brilliant.  But I'm leaning towards the latter.

Today's the day, hopefully.  We hae an appointment in a few hours for an ultrasound and the twins are old enough now that the doctor should be able to tell the sex.  That is, if they'll cooperate.  So there may be some news posted here later today.

A prayer here and there that the ultrasound go well and that the twins are nice and healthy would, as always, be much appreciated.

Don't feel like getting up at 4 AM and standing in line for a $5 toaster?  Amazon is having a Black Friday sale that you don't even have to leave the house to take advantage of.

From ScrappleFace, concerning Hillary's "asbestos pantsuit" that she brought to the debate last night:

China Recalls Hillary Clinton's Asbestos Pantsuit

(2007-11-16) — Chinese authorities today announced a sweeping recall of garments manufactured with asbestos, including the pantsuit worn by Sen. Hillary Clinton during last night’s Democrat presidential debate.

Sen. Clinton’s trousers were marketed mostly through retailers in the Washington D.C. region, and made from "a political-grade fabric that provides protection from spontaneous combustion, thus avoiding the embarrassment of 'pants on fire'."

Because asbestos is the leading cause of lung cancer in laboratory mice and rats, experts said it posed a particular danger to Sen. Clinton's rivals on the stage last night.

The Chinese government apologized to the former First Lady for shipping the flame-retardant slacks, and said she could either return them for a refund, or try asbestos abatement through dry cleaning.

A spokesman for the Clinton campaign said the candidate had no worries, "because Hillary has a lot of friends in Chinatown who are experts at laundering things, and would love to contribute to her campaign in any way they can."

Heh, "pants on fire", that's great.

Michelle Malkin is still covering the protests in Olympia, Washington.  Parents there are blocking military deliveries and supplies by placing themselves in the way of the trucks.

Oh, and their kids too.

From an eyewitness, and the one who took the picture to the right (and others in the story -- click the link above to see more heart-warming goodness):

I work at the port, and have observed some truly mind boggling events unfold, but the most astonishing was the use of children as human shields. The attached pictures were taken on 11/9/07; the night military equipment was first blocked from leaving the port. The Olympia Police Department essentially abandoned any effort to remove the protesters out of fear that a child would be harmed in their efforts to enforce the law. The mother of these children apparently had no such concern.

After the military convoy was forced to retreat, a victory celebration ensued, with chanting dancing, etc. I was horrified to watch as the woman in the attached photograph, distracted by events, allowed her infant to fall from her lap and land, face first on the pavement. The second photo shows her retrieving the crying baby as her other two children, dressed as terrorists look on.

This situation, and another two days later, when dozens of college aged girls were arrayed in rows with arms linked to block the road, showed a deliberate effort to use the same tactics as the terrorist savages who manipulate us, knowing that decent people cannot abide putting innocents in harm’s way. And, while the police were dragging the females away, under the glare of the media’s cameras, the males were establishing rolling blockades; throwing rocks at police and military vehicles; breaking windows, etc.

(emphasis mine) Original story.

Dan Rather is suing CBS.  You may remember that after presenting clearly false documents as real ones during a Presidential election, and then still holding to the veracity (if not validity) of the documents, Dan Rather was fired (or resigned, whichever they said publicly).

So what is the basis of his lawsuit?  He's claming he was the victim of a massive conspiracy stretching from CBS executives all the way to the White House.

Today, in New York Supreme Court, in response to Dan Rather's civil lawsuit, CBS filed a lengthy 30-page motion to dismiss the case.

CBS executives also released a statement today, noting that they are "mystified" by Rather's "bizarre allegations" but will "vigorously" defend themselves in court if need be.

"Dan Rather is one of the most important figures in the history of broadcast journalism, and for more than 40 years was one of our most valued colleagues," CBS said in the statement. "That is why we at CBS are mystified and saddened by the baseless and self-serving allegations and distortions of fact raised in his lawsuit."

"Today we are filing a motion to dismiss," added the statement. "If we are required to proceed beyond this point, we will defend the case vigorously and demonstrate that the lawsuit is wholly without merit, and that the bizarre allegations by Mr. Rather are untrue."

"The Complaint is predicated on allegations of a bizarre 'scheme' extending from the White House to an array of CBS executives including Sumner Redstone, CBS's Executive Chairman, Leslie Moonves, CBS's Chief Executive Officer, and Andrew Heyward, formerly president of CBS News, all of whom, according to Rather, colluded to harm Rather's reputation and keep him off the air," add CBS lawyers. "Of course, there was no such nefarious scheme, and Rather's allegations bear no resemblance to reality. CBS and its executives are not now, and never have been, out to get Dan Rather."

So, we'll see what comes of this...

Huckabee's rating jump in Iowa:

Graph from Real Clear Politics.

My Presidential pick, Mike Huckabee, is on the move in Iowa:

The latest polls out of Iowa, dating back to the middle of October, show what is now more than a few good days for the former Arkansas Governor: They show him clearly, solidly in second place in the GOP race. That's a huge accomplishment for a guy with no money.

In a mid-October University of Iowa poll, Huckabee was tied for second place. In subsequent polls from American Research Group, Zogby, CBS/New York Times and Strategic Vision, he's in second place by himself, by as many as seven points, in the Strategic Vision poll, and six points, in the CBS/NYT poll. He trails only Mitt Romney, though by 12.8 points in the latest RCP Iowa Average.

The Huckmentum is unbelievable, considering that Huckabee has fewer staffers total than Romney has in Iowa alone. But with Sam Brownback out of the race, and despite big evangelical endorsements for Romney, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson and John McCain, could it be that rank-and-file Christian conservatives are making Huckabee the candidate of their choice?

If so, look for Huckabee to sustain his momentum. The Iowa Christian vote is estimated by some to be as high as 40% of the GOP base. If Huckabee can form a coalition of even half those voters, he will vault himself into serious contention. For the record, Politics Nation said Huckabee would do well as far back as December of 2005, though we will admit that we were selling more stock than we were buying in recent months.

All good news, especially considering the odds that Guiliani will just fade away and Mitt Romney has no chance whatsoever.

Flying in the face of, well, really almost every religion on the planet, DNC Chairman and nutjob extraordinaire Howard Dean said the following on Monday:

"This country is not a theocracy. There are fundamental differences between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party believes that everybody in this room ought to be comfortable being an American Jew, not just an American; that there are no bars to heaven for anybody; that we are not a one-religion nation; and that no child or member of a football team ought to be able to cringe at the last line of a prayer before going onto the field."

So there you have it.  The Democratic Party has decided that there are no bars to heaven -- that anyone can get in regardless of faith, works, grace, or whatever.

A Santa training course in Australia is urging their students to be more politically sensitive:

Thirty trainees at a Santa course in Adelaide last month, held by recruitment company Westaff, were urged to replace the traditional festive greeting with "ha, ha, ha".

A Santa veteran of 11 years who attended the course told the Sunday Mail  the trainer was very clear in spelling out no to "ho".

Two Santa hopefuls reportedly left the course after the trainer's edict.

The term "ho" is also American slang for a prostitute. "We were told it (ho) was a derogatory term for females and can upset people," said the Santa, who did not want to be identified publicly.

The policy doesn't seem to be getting much support as the rest of the article basically points out why it's absurd and the online poll was around 96% against the idea.  Just to be fair to the Aussies -- we all have our crazy contingents.

New York Governor Spitzer has dropped both his plan to issue illegal aliens driver's licenses, and his great idea of imposing sales tax on purchases from online retailers like Amazon.  You know, right before Christmas.  Hillary was guardedly supportive of the plan (while, naturally, blaming it on the President at the same time) during the October 30 debate:

Well, what Governor Spitzer is trying to do is fill the vacuum left by the failure of this administration to bring about comprehensive immigration reform. We know in New York we have several million at any one time who are in New York illegally. They are undocumented workers. They are driving on our roads. The possibility of them having an accident that harms themselves or others is just a matter of the odds. It's probability.

Well, it's not probability, there are a number of skill and attention factors in play, etc.  Still, whatever.  Then after the politically tone-deaf Governor withdrew that proposal, and after her aides had already said she supported the measure, Hillary said:

I support Governor Spitzer's decision today to withdraw his proposal. His difficult job is made that much harder by the failure of the Congress and the White House to pass comprehensive immigration reform.

As President, I will not support drivers' licenses for undocumented people and will press for comprehensive immigration reform that deals with all of the issues around illegal immigration including border security and fixing our broken system.

I know; stop the presses.  A Clinton changed an issue stance overnight and likely coerced the Governor into shutting up right before a debate.  It's all just lead in to the real thing I wanted to post.  This was Obama's spokesman Bill Burton on Wednesday about the whole issue:

When it takes two weeks and six different positions to answer one question on immigration, it's easier to understand why the Clinton campaign would rather plant their questions than answer them.