Now monthly. It's on at 3 PM Eastern now, still on Rightalk.

We'll be talking to Mark W. Smith, author of Disrobed: The New Battleplan to Break the Left's Stranglehold on the Courts. And he'll be floating the idea that future victims of terrorism can sue the NYT on an "aiding and abetting" theory, which I think is a stretch, but what the hell.

Bumped: About a half hour from now. Hmmm. Time for some Val-U-Rite Discount Vodka. Haven't had that in a while.

I wouldn't say I had a drinking problem, per se. What I have is a drinking solution.

Call in at 866-884-TALK.

Posted by: Ace at 10:46 AM | Comments (16)
Post contains 119 words, total size 1 kb.

It's a humpback, not a sperm whale (why do all whales have dirty names? I thought this was just a coincidence until I went on a whale-watching excursion and spotted what I was told was a "Dirty Lesbian Busty Teen Whale"), but it's close enough to Moby Dick.

Thanks to yls.

Posted by: Ace at 09:27 AM | Comments (19)
Post contains 63 words, total size 1 kb.

Andrew Sullivan, once again a pioneer.

For some time, St. Andrew of the Sacred Heart-Ache has been using a disingenuous device to post unhinged shit while retaining plausible deniability.

A reader will send in an unhinged email, and Sullivan will post it prominently. But then, to retain some amount of credibility, he'll give a quick disavowal of the email.

He does so again here. Here's a bit of the email he thought was so important to share with the world:

Having observed the president's behavior in office, I wonder if he might be wrong [about not having been a true, addicted alcoholic]. Perhaps not only the president, but also his administration, suffers from alcoholism. After all, arrogance and the inability to take responsibility for one's actions, classic alcoholic traits, have become trademarks of the Bush presidency.

Sullivan, having shared this "interesting theory" on his blog, then goes into CYA mode with this:

This is too simplistic an analysis, of course. And yet the president's alcoholism is integral to his personality; and it's certainly as worth debating as his predecessor's sexual addiction.

He does this an awful lot. First comes the unhinged post, then comes a tepid rebuttal, like "This overstates the case, but..."

If Andrew Sullivan is as "brave" as he likes to pretend: Why not just float his "interesting theories" under his own byline, rather than through the dishonest device of, ahem, merely quoting his unhinged leftist readers?

Hmmmm... maybe I should try this. I just got this interesting email from a reader calling himself "Illinois Nazi:"

I think that most of the thorniest social problems we struggle with today can be explained, to some extent, by examining them through the Jew-Black Double-Team Prism. Whether it's abortion, or terrorism, or Enron, many problems facing the American public today are attributable to the fact that the JEW is moving in on you, and he's using the BLACK MAN as MUSCLE. And you are left DEFENSELESS.

Well, that may be somewhat reductivist, I suppose. Nevertheless, it certainly does seem a useful template for analyzing today's politics.

Thanks to Allah, who reads Sullivan because I just can't anymore.

Related: And now the BLACK MAN is using JEW MONEY to move in on you, and you are, again, left DEFENSELESS.

Another Interesting Email... From Scot. Well, a comment really.

I think Sullivan's passive aggresiveness is an indication of underlying emotional problems, possibly Borderline Personality Disorder. And, yet, that may be an oversimplified explaination of his behavior.

I would never stoop to making such penny-ante psychiatric diagnoses myself, but I find it nevertheless interesting that Sullivan does, in fact, exhibit many of the symptoms of the Borderline Personality Disorder. Narcissism, solipsism, splitting -- the classic symptom.

Splitting is something BPDers do all the time. First you are the greatest thing since sliced bread and they praise you to the heavens. Then, when you can't remain up on the unreasonably-high platform they've put you on, and you become the worst miscreant who ever benighted the earth by his mere existence.

Splitting. Check out his rather uncomfortably "crushy" early posts on Bush, and compare them to unhinged venom of the past few years.

Anyway, once again, I personally would never, out of my own mouth, propose such a nasty psychiatric diagnosis of someone based only on his writings.

However, I have to say that if Bush's "alcoholism" is relevant for discussing his politics, so is Andrew Sullivan's Borderline Personality Disorder.

Did I say he actually had BPD? Whoops! He may or may not have it, by which I mean he does.

Ooopsie! I said it again. My bad. Okay, let me passively-aggressively say that I don't know if he has BPD -- that's between him and his mental-health-care provider -- but is, let us say, symptomatic.

Posted by: Ace at 08:26 AM | Comments (50)
Post contains 639 words, total size 4 kb.

Police are baffled why a man began randomly shooting his co-workers. (NOTE: The headline was chosen for its alliteration, not its accuracy; it doesn't seem as if anyone was actually killed. But "Motiveless Would-Be Mass-Murdering Muslim Maniac" doesn't all start with M's.)

However, FordÂ’s younger sister Khali told 9News her brother was upset because people were making fun of his religion at work.

“I don’t know what happened to him yesterday. It was like everything changed,” Khali said. “He told me that Allah was going to make a choice and it was going to be good and told me people at his job was making fun of his religion and he didn’t respect that."

You'll be happy to know that police say his religious affiliation is not being considered as a factor in his motive for the assaults. Pretty much they're baffled, and are determined to stay that way.

In related news, Encyclopedia Brown is said to be "positively stumped" in his most recent case, but has "completely ruled out" any involvement by Bugs Meaney.

Posted by: Ace at 07:54 AM | Comments (19)
Post contains 191 words, total size 1 kb.

600 pound woman thrown through sunroof of SUV by mishap.

Thirty-seven-year-old Ruth Matthews told paramedics that another vehicle cut her off in traffic, and she took evasive action to avoid a crash. Her Isuzu Amigo rolled over and she was thrown through the sunroof and onto the roadway. Investigators say she was not wearing her seatbelt.

Paramedics initially tried to fly Matthews to Tampa General Hospital, but her weight, estimated at 600 pounds, made it impossible. Emergency crews were able to transport her to St. JosephÂ’s Hospital, where she is listed in stable condition.

Obviously that's kind of embarrassing and sad. Add that to the list of ways to know you need to start losing weight. 1-- paramedics need to cut a hole through your wall to get to you because you can't move from the bed; 2 -- you have to be moved from your home by crane; 3 -- you can't be airlifted by a typical light helicopter.

Remember the 1,235 pound Mexican guy? He's actually on a diet. And he's lost 200 pounds. Which can't be all water weight, even for him.

That's Barry Sears, inventor of "The Zone" diet, which sucks, by the way. Anyway, the Mexican heavyweight is on that diet, and Sears is proud about his losing so much weight.

Although I think he's going to have to firm up a little more before they start using his picture in adverts.

Thanks to JackStraw and yls, respectively.

Posted by: Ace at 07:39 AM | Comments (31)
Post contains 247 words, total size 2 kb.

...but then again, this editorial was written three days after September 11. That was back when we were at war.

Apparently we're not anymore. The New York Times editorial staff decided we're not at a war, so we're not.

The first week after 9/11, I was angry that they hadn't secured a formal declaration of war against Al Qaeda. Democrats wouldn't declare the obvious. As well as some Republicans, like Chuck Hegel.

In the spirit of amity, Bush did not press the issue, although he could have uncovered a lot of peaceniks for what they were right quick if he had demanded a formal declaration of war.

I thought that was a mistake then and still think so now. It is the lack of a formal declaration of war that permits Bill Keller to publish state secrets without much fear of prosecution.

So: Let's pass it.

It's time for a formal declaration of war on Al Qaeda. No Democrats will vote for it, and some Republicans won't, but we should be able to get it through. Let us have no more questions about the legal status of this war, and what consequences treason may have.

Posted by: Ace at 07:05 AM | Comments (17)
Post contains 205 words, total size 1 kb.

If only liberal judges were so obliging in the US!

Ah, well. The British are sometimes polite to the point of pathos.

They're still trying to make nice-nice with radical imams in London, after all.

Posted by: Ace at 08:00 PM | Comments (22)
Post contains 67 words, total size 1 kb.

Well, well, well. Just as an unknown liberal blogger leaks damaging information about Kos -- who's connected to former blogger Jerome Armstrong, hired on as a consultant for Mark Warner's presidential campaign -- and damages the Kos-Armstrong brand-name...

...it just so happens that Hillary Clinton hires a competing liberal blogger/consultant, Peter Daou, as her nutroots outreach representative.

Was Peter Daou, by a happy coincidence, on that Townhouse emailing list?

Posted by: Ace at 07:55 PM | Comments (17)
Post contains 79 words, total size 1 kb.

That seems to be the suggestion here in this interview with Bill Keller. He says he talked to three people outside of the administration regarding whether or not he should commit treason, and two of them -- 9/11 Commissioners Tom Kean (R) and Lee Hamilton (D) -- urged him not to.

He then says that one of the three did not counsel against publication.

As the third person talked to was Murtha, that would seem to suggest that Murtha told them it would be okay to publish it.

In his wholly unbiased opinion. You know, the unbiased, non-Bush-deranged guy who claims the US is more of a threat to peace than North Korea and Iran.

I can't decide what's more shocking -- that this cocksucker Murtha would tell the NYT, on his own dubious authority, that it's okay to violate the Espionage Act, or that the New York Times would consider John Fucking Murtha a disinterested, unbiased arbiter on the matter.

Fuck, why not just ask Cindy Sheehan, Michael Moore, George Soros, and Michael Berg?

And... If you haven't seen Treasury Secretary John Snow's letter to Bill Keller, you might want to check that out.

Thanks to DDG for the latter.

And There's Still More... Now How Much Would You Pay?: Another Pulitzer-winning scoop from the NYT:

WAZIRISTAN—An American soldier, clinging to a cliff face littered with broken shale and animal bones in Waziristan, northwest Pakistan, is currently engaging in direct, unwarranted surveillance of Osama bin Laden, confidential sources have revealed to the New York Times.

The soldier’s conduct raises questions about the Bush administration’s policy of covert surveillance and intelligence gathering in support of his “War on Terror”. Constitutional experts are “troubled” by this and similar unwarranted searches that are designed to gather information on terrorists, but may reveal private information about American citizens instead.

Correction: I originally inadvertantly wrote that Tony Snow wrote the letter.

Inadvertantly is a funny word. What does it mean? Does it mean it was merely a printer's mistake/typo? Or a bona fide mistake of fact?

Kinda right there in the middle-- not explicitly denying an actual mistake, but not really admitting one either.

It's the media's favorite word when mentioning corrections.

Nice.

Posted by: Ace at 06:30 PM | Comments (51)
Post contains 385 words, total size 3 kb.

I expect the NYT -- determined to inform the public no matter whom it might harm -- to be all over this.

Thanks to Dan from Riehl World.

Posted by: Ace at 12:34 PM | Comments (16)
Post contains 44 words, total size 1 kb.