| Morning Jolt
. . . with Jim Geraghty September 19, 2014 It's a United Kingdom After All! 
Sorry, lassies.
The "nays" have it! Voters in Scotland decisively rejected independence from the United Kingdom in a referendum that had threatened to break up the 307-year union, but also appeared to open the way for a looser, more federal Britain. | | Demote Harry Reid This Fall | | | | With results tallied from all 32 voting districts, the "no" campaign won 55.3 percent of the vote while the pro-independence side won 44.7 percent. The margin was greater than forecast by virtually all pre-election polls . . . The decision spared Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain a shattering defeat that would have raised questions about his ability to continue in office and would have diminished his nation's standing in the world. 
"WHAT?"
One of the first voices I want to hear from when there's big news in the British Isles is Daniel Hannan, member of the European Parliament and friend of NR: Thank God. Just thank God. I don't much care at the moment whether God is Scottish, and is glowering approvingly at Great Britain from over His bands and Geneva gown, or whether He is English and is raising a glass of sherry with an absent-minded smile. At least my country is intact. When I say, "my country", I don't just mean what it says on my passport. I'm one of those UK nationals — a minority, perhaps, but not an insignificant one — who self-identify as British. In England, Scotland and Wales, older patriotisms generally take precedence (Northern Ireland is a special case, obviously). Although many people across Great Britain are convinced, indeed passionate, Unionists, a "Yes" vote wouldn't have forced them to redefine their identity. The UK might have been divided, and they might have been sorry to see it go, but they'd have carried on being English or Scottish or Welsh. Those of us who are British first had no such fall-back. A "Yes" vote would have meant the end of the country we belonged to — the end of its name, of its flag, of our internal map of home. Hannan notes a likely future step is expanded local control for certain government powers — something both capital-C Conservatives and small-c conservatives generally like to see. A happy ending in the news, for once! Last night's tweets as Sean Connery can be found here. Hey, Hey, BHO, How Much Did You Underestimate Our Foe? Remember yesterday's comparison of Obama to Lyndon Johnson, because he wants to personally approve each bombing target in Syria? That parallel looks a bit stronger this morning: The United States has made the same mistake in evaluating fighters from the Islamic State that it did in Vietnam — underestimating the enemy's will, according to James Clapper, the director of national intelligence. Asked whether the intelligence community had succeeded in its goal of providing "anticipatory intelligence" about the extremist movement in Syria and Iraq that has declared itself the Islamic State, Clapper said his analysts had reported the group's emergence and its "prowess and capability," as well as the "deficiencies" of the Iraqi military. Then he offered a self-critique:
"What we didn't do was predict the will to fight. That's always a problem. We didn't do it in Vietnam. We underestimated the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese and overestimated the will of the South Vietnamese. In this case, we underestimated ISIL [the Islamic State] and overestimated the fighting capability of the Iraqi army. . . . I didn't see the collapse of the Iraqi security force in the north coming. I didn't see that. It boils down to predicting the will to fight, which is an imponderable." Clapper and other intelligence officials were later treated for injuries related to falling on their swords. In other news of the fight against the Islamic State . . . Flashes of disagreement over how to fight the Islamic State are mounting between President Obama and U.S. military leaders, the latest sign of strain in what often has been an awkward and uneasy relationship. Even as the administration has received congressional backing for its strategy, with the Senate voting Thursday to approve a plan to arm and train Syrian rebels, a series of military leaders have criticized the president's approach against the Islamic State militant group. Oh, Hey, So Apparently Christie Never Knew About the Bridge Closure All Along So . . . where does Chris Christie go to get his reputation back? The U.S. Justice Department investigation into New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's role in "Bridgegate" has thus far uncovered no information he either knew in advance or directed the closure of traffic lanes on the George Washington Bridge, federal officials tell NBC 4 New York. Federal officials caution that the investigation begun nine months ago is ongoing and that no final determination has been made, but say that after nine months authorities have uncovered no information Christie either knew in advance or ordered the closure of traffic lanes. "My experience with federal law enforcement is that once you reach critical mass if you don't have it within nine months or so you're not likely to ever get it," former federal prosecutor Robert W. Ray said. Save Jersey: "So what is MSNBC going to use for content now that @GovChristie is exonerated? Loop Oliver Stone movies and old Soviet propaganda films? Someone better check on Kornacki and Maddow . . ." Are Conservative Books Being Omitted From the New York Times Bestseller List? So how well is David Limbaugh's new book selling? The big-name bestseller lists might not give you an accurate picture. Paul Bedard writes: The New York Times Book Review, which has a history of belatedly recognizing conservative bestsellers, has banished conservative legal author David Limbaugh's latest, Jesus on Trial, from its upcoming best seller list despite having sales better than 17 other books on the list. According to publishing sources, Limbaugh's probe into the accuracy of the Bible sold 9,660 in its first week out, according to Nielsen BookScan. That should have made it No. 4 on the NYT print hardcover sales list. Instead, Henry Kissinger's World Order, praised by Hillary Clinton in the Washington Post, is No. 4 despite weekly sales of 6,607. The average reader probably thinks that there's one central repository of book-sales data. Nope. Larry Correia, a bestselling author by just about every standard, laid out how the New York Times' bestseller list works — or at least what we're allowed to know about it: The NYT bestseller list is based upon the reported numbers from a select, supposedly secret group of reporting bookstores. It is also based on the sales for one week, so it isn't looking at overall sales as much as sales velocity. For example, if a book sells a thousand copies a week for the whole year, it probably won't make the list, but if a book sells 10,000 copies in one week and never sells another copy again, it will be a bestseller. This is how the Snookis and various Real House Wives end up on the list, yet they're the most bargain binned and remaindered type of book there is. The most accurate measure of book sales is Nielsen Bookscan, because about 70% of bookstores report their sales to it. It is a way better measure than the NYT, but since most regular people have never heard of it, that's why you never see authors putting Nielsen Bookscan bestseller on their bios. Keep in mind however that saying something is more accurate than the NYT is damning with faint praise, most of that sweet paying stuff I listed in the previous paragraphs isn't in there either, so it is only a partial picture of how an author is actually doing. And as it turns out, some aren't so sure Nielsen Bookscan is such a reliable measure of total sales, either. The Amazon ranking is more specific, but it obviously only measures the sales through that site, and offers separate rankings for printed books and e-books. And the ranking can soar and drop rapidly, every couple hours, based on relative handful of sales. Correia's post above offers a lot of good details about how advances, royalties, film-and TV-option rights work, etc. The Weed Agency is doing well, so I should take another opportunity to thank the Jolt readers who bought a copy (or two!). The Weed Agency is . . . $9.97 on Amazon, $7.99 on Kindle, $9.97 at Barnes and Noble, $9.99 on Nook, and IndieBound can steer you to an independent bookseller near you. One reader asked if I had anything against Books-a-Million, and I don't, I just forgot to look it up there: $11.41 over on that site, $9.99 for the e-book. ADDENDA: If you missed Episode Three of the Jim and Mickey Show, it features a discussion of Ray Rice and Mickey demonstrating she knows way too much about Jack the Ripper. Okay, that was one of our darker episodes. Episode Four hits today, a lighter one featuring how to handle friends with odd hobbies, "cosplay", television dads, how the weekly format of John Oliver's "This Week Tonight" requires him to avoid the easy jokes, and more. Note our special corporate sponsor for the week. 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 DemoteReid.com today.
To read more, visit www.nationalreview.com
| Why not forward this to a friend? Encourage them to 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. | 
Follow | 
Tweet | 
NR Podcasts | 
Send | National Review, Inc.
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 | 
Comments
Post a Comment