Okay.

After being proved the father of a woman's baby, he cries rape:

"She raped me," the Yonkers native told editor Jamie Foster Brown. "I mean, you know, that might sound like some bullshit. No man has ever been... you know what I mean, like never? Is that the only thing in the world that's not possible?"

It's one of them, DMX. There's a reason you didn't get that call-back after your audition for The Accused.

Johnny Triangles wonders how far DMX's gangsta-cred is going to fall now he's admitted to being savagely violated by a chick. He got punked by a ho. A bitch made him her bitch.

I wonder if she slapped him around to keep his sweet ass from squirming away.

I wonder if he cried in the fetal position in the shower like Glen Close afterwards.

I wonder if he brought it on himself by dressing like a tramp.

I wonder a lot of things. I guess about the mechanics of it, first and foremost.

Bonus: Check out who supports his story.

Posted by: Ace at 02:43 PM | Comments (67)
Post contains 192 words, total size 1 kb.

Well! I didn't know that.

I guess I should have, as they're all available for me when I look for them (which is sort of convenient); on the other hand, I'm not really cool with private correspondence on Google's servers, either.

I suppose all emails and IM's are pretty much saved somewhere out there.

Posted by: Ace at 02:32 PM | Comments (35)
Post contains 74 words, total size 1 kb.

I didn't know "Swift-Boating" included publicizing videotapes of a Congressmen bravely and nobly holding out for a bigger bribe.

The full video can be found here, but it's almost an hour long and boring. The short moneyshot that aired on Hannity and Colmes last night is much punchier, and I'm still not getting why Allah, Ian, and Bryan don't make themselves useful little videomonkeys and post it.

And... Corker-Ford race in a dead heat.

Update: Allah's added the brief moneyshot clip to his original post.

Posted by: Ace at 01:58 PM | Comments (32)
Post contains 101 words, total size 1 kb.

Update From Fox: Foley is claiming to have been molested as a kid, which his lawyer says does not excuse his behavior, but does add "context."

Possibility 4). Should have seen that one coming.

I knew a guy at work who got nailed for looking at kid porn from work computers. He immediately claimed the same thing.

Bombshell? Hardly. It's just a legally-irrelevant pseudodefense, probably cooked up by his crisis-response team.

...

Starting soon.

Can't really imagine what it could be. Except if he's going to claim 1) Republicans knew all about his short-eyes IM's and covered for him, or 2) some of the IM's have been faked.

Of course, now that he's facing criminal liability, 2) isn't exactly a surprise, nor necessarily a credible claim.

Another possibility is 3) I ain't the only one. Sort of a contrition/let me protect children which was always my real hope deal. 3) would definitely be interesting, though I don't think pedophilia is a phenomenon more pronounced on the left.

Heh: The "dKosepedia" -- who knew there was such a thing? -- had an early entry on Gerry Studds, censured for having sex with a seventeen year old boy page which blamed the "anti-gay crew" for "demonizing" him.

Now that the left's marching orders have come down -- it's now politically useful to pretend you're against gay men having sex with underage boys -- the entry has been changed to delete the shoot-the-messenger defense, and, jeeze louise, even seems somewhat down on pederasty.

Posted by: Ace at 01:37 PM | Comments (48)
Post contains 286 words, total size 2 kb.

No real theme, except they're all monster hits, reflecting the monster Dow, and they put me in a good mood. Plus, I don't know how to otherwise link them with other songs. One sort of is about the House race, and the last one is there to proclaim the "Decade of Greed" of the 80's is back, baby. more...

Posted by: Ace at 12:51 PM | Comments (35)
Post contains 149 words, total size 4 kb.

The Golden Cowbell image with the Ace of Spades Cowbell Theme attached (click on it for song). [Song courtesy of Blaster's Blog.]

But maybe even that isn't sinking in to your thick, Cro-magnon moronskulls. So additional audio-visual cues of a slightly risque nature are provided after the jump. more...

Posted by: Ace at 12:14 PM | Comments (61)
Post contains 275 words, total size 3 kb.

Okay, I added in that last part about the violation of the Geneva Conventions.

But I think it's implied.

There are two parties out there. One cares that Gitmo terrorists are stuffing themselves with fatty foods, the other isn't quite sure why we don't just toss them a hack saw and a tourniquet and tell them "You should probably start with the calves; there's some good eatin' on those."

Choose.

Posted by: Ace at 12:09 PM | Comments (24)
Post contains 128 words, total size 1 kb.

Hugh Hewitt urges Hastert to fight back.

Tom Maguire seems sort of annoyed at the deliberate conflation of the emails (not especially frightening) and the IM's (hair-raising) by liberals determined to claim, oddly, that it's the Republican Party, not Gerry Studds' party, that is soft on gay sex with underage pages.

And even Allah, who joined me in yesterday's full-frontal freak-out, now seems eager to try to win, if only for the challenge of it all.

He's also got a video of Hastert's most interesting moments in an interview about Foleygate.

Posted by: Ace at 12:03 PM | Comments (35)
Post contains 111 words, total size 1 kb.

The head of OPEC calls for production cuts, but so far the Saudis haven't agreed. OPEC's head is a Nigerian, and they've already cut production, but it takes Saudi cooperation to really lower supply.

Meanwhile:

With five minutes left, we're a couple of points above the all-time closing high, but it looks like it's going to fall below it.

Update: They pushed it to the highest stock market close in history.

Maybe the markets are more sanguine on the elections than I am.

Posted by: Ace at 11:56 AM | Comments (49)
Post contains 121 words, total size 1 kb.

Any questions I should ask?

Whoops, he's just getting off now as he's getting on a plane to speak to Eastern European audiences about freedom.

I'll type up my shabby notes later.

One question I asked was about the much-maligned Patriot Act. A lot of people seem to be against this for vague reasons, and yet I've seen very little, if any, specific objections to it. The only specific objection I've read has to do with libraries. I didn't get to follow-up about the Great Library Scare, but I didn't have to, becaus Ashcroft went there himself.

I asked specifically if there were any provisions he thought were unwise, or, alternately, what he considered the best specific objection to the Patriot Act from those who objected, even if he himself didn't agree with the objection.

He declined to answer the latter part, stating he "wouldn't make the other guy's case for him" (note: quotes here are very loose paraphrases, by and large), but went on to note that Dianne Feinstein had gotten 20,000 emails and letters and phone calls complaining about specific alleged violations of civil liberties due to the Patriot Act, but few of these had anything to do with the Patriot Act. Some, he said, had to do with complaints about the post office (I couldn't break in to ask what these complaints were). When he asked the ACLU for specific alleged civil-rights violations of the Patriot Act, he said, they were unable to produce any. Further, he said, there have not been any successful lawsuits proving any violations.

Those who oppose the Patriot Act, he said, have done so "very profitably," using vaguely sinister allegations to drum up contributions. He regrets having been such an important cog in the ACLU's fund-raising operations.

He noted that pure ignorance keeps people believing that, prior to the Patriot Act, the government couldn't subpoena business or financial (or any other) records; somehow people have this idea that prior to the Patriot Act, no one could look into your books, even with a court order.

And he then said that he found it ridiculous to imagine that there is a "special sanctuary" for library records, that all other records can be compelled via a court order, but that "child porn predators and terrorists" were somehow immunized from subpoenaes should their internet use or research be conducted in a library.

Well, hear hear to that. I am baffled that just about any record -- including sensitive medical records -- may be subpoenaed by the state given sufficient grounds and a court order, and yet what you do in a library is, according to the left, absolutely sacrosanct. Why? Who knows. Free exchange of ideas or something like that. And yet it baffles me that if a man were using a library computer to make arrangements with a hitman to kill his wife, the sanctimonious librarians and ACLU would claim his illegal solicitation of murder should be, for reasons unfathomable, protected from any examination by the state.

If the coloration of your penis, for crying out loud, is material to a criminal investigation (as it was in the Michael Jackson investigations), the state can compel the production of records relating to your dingus; and yet, we're told, it's unAmerican to request internet-use records or a list of books a terrorist might have checked out.

Frankly, I think it's just because librarians lead extraodinarily boring lives and this is the One Sexy Thing they've ever been involved in. Makes them feel important, standing up to the state and all, before going back home every night to eat their Salad For One and watch Gray's Anatomy.

I also think it's part of the liberals' time-warp sense of unreality, where it's perpetually the darkest year of McCarthyism and Boston censorship, and they really, really believe in their hearts that the government is on patrol to find out which subversives have been reading Catcher in the Rye and Tropic of Cancer.

I rather doubt the government would seek a subpeona (or that one would be issued) just to find out who's reading Judy Blume or Martha Grimes' mysteries, but the left is pretty damn sure John Ashcroft is interested in such things.

And hence, as always, the OUTRAGE!

I have a simple rule. If the state can get hold of your private financial records, or your even more private medical or psychological records, I can't see how there's some implicit constitutional protection of which Oprah Book Club recommendations are on your reservation list.

John Ashcroft's Book, Never Again, is excerpted here, and is available via Amazon here.

I would try to get a hold of it through Amazon, or from a friend, because you just don't want the G-men finding out you rented it from a library.

Posted by: Ace at 11:08 AM | Comments (42)
Post contains 811 words, total size 5 kb.