Four hundred pounds of stupid in a three hundred pound sack of fat.

"He essentially followed the Nuremberg principles," Moore claimed, "which is when you see something going on like this, when you see war crimes being committed, when you see lies being told in order to bring a country to war, you have to speak out against it."

Moore thought that Manning "is exactly who we want in our armed forces," and deserves the Profile in Courage award for helping to make the WikiLeaks public knowledge. "You can't just line up and be a good German and do what you're told to do," Moore said in defense of Manning's audacity.

You know who I'd like in our armed forces? Some more of the keyboard kommandos who told us they were so darned in favor of the war in Afghanistan, they just hated the one in Iraq and Bush.

Well, now, there is very little fighting in Iraq and Bush has been gone for coming on two years; I have yet to have heard about a spike in enlistment among our soft-handed JournoList types.

Posted by: Ace at 01:52 PM | Comments (140)
Post contains 222 words, total size 1 kb.

Before you ask: No, the headline's not a mistake, it's a joke I heard from steve_in_hb.

Awful.

My guess? This is exactly what it looks like: Levi Johnston was confronted with the possibility of having to actually work for a living, decided against that, pwn3d Bristol into thinking he wanted to reconcile to cadge $100,000 from Us weekly and peddle a reality show, then decided to amp up the fireworks again for the tabloids that are paying his rent, etc.

Little bastard.

Was Bristol in on it? No. The girl doesn't need money; her mother, unlike Levi's, isn't a meth-whore.

Levi Johnston, Levi Johnston? I have a call for you on line one; it's your future, and it says it's calling from a McDonald's drive-through window.

No, I'm sorry, Levi; your future isn't calling from the customer side of the window, either. Sorry. No ritzy McDonald-consuming future for you, I'm afraid.

Posted by: Ace at 01:35 PM | Comments (171)
Post contains 191 words, total size 1 kb.

I wouldn't jump at the AP -- they seem skeptical of Nancy Pelosi's swamp-dryness estimations.

The AP writer expanded on the headline in his lede: "Democratic leaders say they've emptied the swamp of congressional corruption. Never mind the ethics trials to come for two longtime party members. 'Drain the swamp we did, because this was a terrible place,' Speaker Nancy Pelosi said last week of the Republican rule in the House that ended in January 2007."

While he mentions the current cases of Rangel and Waters, he fails to mention Cold Cash Jefferson or the three white guys involved in the PMA corruption scandal. (Why were they targeting the White Congressional Caucus a year ago? Racists.)

I give Nancy Pelosi one thing: She has balls the size of casaba melons. Unlike you-know-who.

And she delivers these lines with such perfect deadpan! Then again, that's years of jigsaw surgery to thank for that.

Posted by: Ace at 01:01 PM | Comments (117)
Post contains 168 words, total size 1 kb.

A reader objects to the prominence I'm giving the gay angle. He points to Manning's chat logs as evidence he was more of an "information wants to be free" hacker-wannabe than an angry homosexual.

(02:23:25 PM) Manning: i couldÂ’ve sold to russia or china, and made bank?

(02:23:36 PM) Lamo: why didnÂ’t you?

(02:23:58 PM) Manning: because itÂ’s public data

(02:24:15 PM) Lamo: i mean, the cables

(02:24:46 PM) Manning: it belongs in the public domain

(02:25:15 PM) Manning: information should be free

(02:25:39 PM) Manning: it belongs in the public domain

(02:26:18 PM) Manning: because another state would just take advantage of the informationÂ… try and get some edge

(02:26:55 PM) Manning: if its out in the openÂ… it should be a public good

(02:27:04 PM) Manning: *do the

(02:27:23 PM) Manning: rather than some slimy intel collector

(02:29:18 PM) Manning: im crazy like that

Well that is important information. However, a criminal's stated reason for his crime is rarely congruent with his actual reason. Especially criminals like this -- spies tend to cast their betrayals in terms of some more defensible greater abstract point.

Spies become spies because of MICES -- Money Ideology Coercion Ego Sex. Which of the mice were driving little Bradley's wheels we can't say yet.

I know for a fact this little bastard did this for personal reasons -- he had a grudge. About what in particular, it's not clear. But this information wants to be free stuff is stuff he got from Assange, the latter bastard providing the former bastard a justification to do what he wanted to do anyway.

But either way this misses my point.

I am sick to death of the media playing stories different ways depending upon whether or not they involve a protected group's member or member of a group they're hostile to.

I am sick to death of the media deciding I'm not cleared to have certain sensitive information, because I might draw the wrong impressions if I know it.

I am sick of the arrogance of these media bastards suppressing facts that don't fit their goddamned Narrative or their favored political policies (such as repealing DADT).

IN: Publishing sensitive data about our SWIFT financial monitoring; secret prisons; secret airlines and secret airstrips; secret contractors and front companies; not too sensitive; will not harm an important American interest

OUT: Publishing data about the tumultuous sexual life of a confirmed traitor. Too sensitive; may harm an important American interest (namely, repealing DADT)

Posted by: Ace at 12:08 PM | Comments (171)
Post contains 430 words, total size 3 kb.

Cook had recently written of recent better Democratic numbers (better as in "not as bad") that they stood a fair chance of losing only a few seats here and there.

But that was substantially based on those two weeks of goofy Gallup numbers showing the Dems gaining big-time on Republicans.

Well, that two week burp is past.

My view for over a year has been that a very bad political environment for Democrats was developing, and I have been convinced for some time that we might well see a wave reminiscent of those of 1994 and 2006, frequently pointing to data that corroborated that view.

Thus, when there were back-to-back weeks of the respected Gallup Poll pointing toward Democrats by margins a bit wider than the normal statistical flutter, it seemed fair to point to it in my National Journal magazine column.

I did so with a healthy level of caution, even skepticism....

Subsequent polling suggests that nothing has happened.

...

The environment still looks exceedingly bad for Democrats and last week's disappointing Commerce Department report that showed the gross domestic product grew 2.4 percent for the second quarter points to an economy so anemic as to make any meaningful improvement in unemployment extremely unlikely between now and Election Day.

...

The Cook Political Report last week upped its projection from a 30-40-seat net gain for Republicans to a 32-42-seat net gain, with our model showing +34 seats for the GOP. This count is more heavily weighted toward individual race dynamics, but my gut feeling -- which, in years like this one, factors in national mood, relative intensity and enthusiasm between the parties and how independents seem to be breaking -- is suggesting somewhat bigger numbers.

The wave is still the wave, and it still looks pretty strong and unabated.

Posted by: Ace at 11:33 AM | Comments (106)
Post contains 356 words, total size 2 kb.

The argument made by the military is that open homosexuality is bad for morale and discipline.

Pfc. Bradley Manning is doing his all to prove that.

I am less outraged by the gay angle here than the media suppression angle: I didn't know this. Did you know this? I never heard a word of this.

That's what you call an embargo, my friends. If it doesn't advance The Narrative, it never really happened.

"The revelations of ManningÂ’s openly pro-homosexual conduct suggest that a more liberal Department of Defense policy, in deference to the wishes of the Commander-in-Chief, had already been in effect and has now backfired in a big way. The result could be not only the loss of the lives of U.S. soldiers, as a result of the enemy understanding U.S. intelligence sources and methods, but damaged relations with Afghanistan and Pakistan and a possible U.S. military defeat in the region as a whole." - Accuracy in Media

...

According to one story appearing in Britain's The Telegraph, Manning, who served as a US Army intelligence analyst, became depressed after a break-up with his homosexual campanion. He also wrote: "Bradley Manning is not a piece of equipment," and quoted a joke about "military intelligence" being an oxymoron.

Manning, who is openly homosexual, began his gloomy postings on January 12, saying: "Bradley Manning didn't want this fight. Too much to lose, too fast."

...

Pentagon investigators plan to delve into ManningÂ’s background to ascertain if they missed any warnings when he applied to join the US Army. According to The Telegraph, in May 2010, when he was serving at a US military base near Baghdad, he changed his status to: "Bradley Manning is now left with the sinking feeling that he doesn't have anything left."

Italics added. I don't mean to be glib but that is in fact a sign they missed something.

And so set loose the Taliban on the heroic peasants cooperating with our military.

After WikiLeaks published a trove of U.S. intelligence documents—some of which listed the names and villages of Afghans who had been secretly cooperating with the American military—it didn’t take long for the Taliban to react. A spokesman for the group quickly threatened to “punish” any Afghan listed as having “collaborated” with the U.S. and the Kabul authorities against the growing Taliban insurgency. In recent days, the Taliban has demonstrated how seriously those threats should be considered. Late last week, just four days after the documents were published, death threats began arriving at the homes of key tribal elders in southern Afghanistan. And over the weekend one tribal elder, Khalifa Abdullah, who the Taliban believed had been in close contact with the Americans, was taken from his home in Monar village, in Kandahar province’s embattled Arghandab district, and executed by insurgent gunmen.

The violence may just be beginning. According to Agha Lali, the deputy head of Kandahar’s provincial council, threatening letters have been delivered to 70 elders in Panjwaii district. While it is unknown whether any of the men were indeed named in the WikiLeaks documents, it’s clear the Taliban believes they have been cooperating with Western forces and the Afghan government. One short handwritten note, shown to NEWSWEEK, said: “We have made a decision for your death. You have five days to leave Afghan soil. If you don’t, you don’t have the right to complain.” The screed, written on the letterhead of Mullah Mohammed Omar’s defunct Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, bore the signature of Abdul Rauf Khadim, a senior Taliban official and former inmate at the American lockup in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, who had been released into—and subsequently escaped from—Kabul’s custody last year.

Into whose arms did this hystrionic little bitch fly? Into the Taliban's, of course. They treat openly-gay homosexuals nicely. (At least the ones branded as homosexual; they seem to have a lot of nuance in the definition 'round Taliban country.)

The Taliban, which did this to a woman who'd fled her family. Warning: Very Graphic Image Below the Fold.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 10:49 AM | Comments (282)
Post contains 860 words, total size 6 kb.

People are pretty jazzed about buying electric cars, until they find out that, you know, they actually cost more than normal cars. A lot more.

It's a Rasmussen HitlerMcBush survey so consider that he probably wants us all to die anyway.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Adults shows that 37% say itÂ’s at least somewhat likely they will buy an electric car in the next decade. Fifty-nine percent (59%), however, say they are not likely to do so. Those numbers include 12% who are Very Likely to buy an electric car and 20% who are Not At All Likely to buy one.

The latest results mark little change from April but show a slightly lower level of support for buying all-electric than last August.

But when asked if theyÂ’d buy one if they knew it would cost $15,000 more than traditional cars of comparable size, just 14% say theyÂ’d be likely to purchase an electric car. Eighty-one percent (81%) say itÂ’s not likely theyÂ’d buy an electric car if it cost that much more. Those numbers include just three percent (3%) who say theyÂ’d be Very Likely to buy electric and 35% who say they wouldnÂ’t be likely at all to buy one at that price.

It was announced last week that General MotorsÂ’ long-anticipated Volt would cost $41,000. The only comparable vehicle on the market currently is the Nissan Leaf priced around $33,000. Both companies are hoping a $7,500 federal tax credit for electric vehicle buyers will offset the initial costs in buyers' minds.

So what does all this money that no one is willing to spend get you? A nice Mercedes or BMW? No, not so much. (It's a NYT link but it's more fun to read the enviros and Obama get rundown there than anywhere else).

For starters, G.M.Â’s vision turned into a car that costs $41,000 before relevant tax breaks ... but after billions of dollars of government loans and grants for the VoltÂ’s development and production. And instead of the sleek coupe of 2007, it looks suspiciously similar to a Toyota Prius. It also requires premium gasoline, seats only four people (the battery runs down the center of the car, preventing a rear bench) and has less head and leg room than the $17,000 Chevrolet Cruze, which is more or less the non-electric version of the Volt.

In short, the Volt appears to be exactly the kind of green-at-all-costs car that some opponents of the bailout feared the government might order G.M. to build. Unfortunately for this theory, G.M. was already committed to the Volt when it entered bankruptcy. And though President Obama’s task force reported in 2009 that the Volt “will likely be too expensive to be commercially successful in the short term,” it didn’t cancel the project.

Nor did the government or G.M. decide to sell the Volt at a loss, which, paradoxically, might have been the best hope for making it profitable. Consider the Prius. Back in 1997, Toyota began selling the high-tech, first-of-its-kind car in Japan for about $17,000, even though each model cost $32,000 to build.

By taking a loss on the first several years of Prius production, Toyota was able to hold its price steady, and then sell the gas-sippers in huge numbers when oil prices soared. Today a Prius costs roughly the same in inflation-adjusted dollars as those 1997 models did, and it has become the best-selling Toyota in the United States after the evergreen Camry and Corolla.

The Volt gets all of 40 miles to the charge. Oh and you have to hook it up to an electrical outlet which means coal or oil is most likely the real source of your 'green' car's power.

So, we own the company and we're on the hook for $7,500/ car? As bad as the auto execs were in running their organizations, at least they only bankrupted a couple of companies. These geniuses in DC have bankrupted a whole nation.

Well played!

Posted by: DrewM at 09:58 AM | Comments (165)
Post contains 697 words, total size 4 kb.

There is a racial angle to this. But not, as the Congressional Black Caucus says and the media dutifully implies, how unfair it is for two black congressmen to be facing the indignity of accountability.

The back-to-back trials of a pair of black lawmakers represent an unprecedented use of an ethics adjudication system that has rarely been used by House members accused of breaking House rulesÂ…

POLITICO first reported earlier this week that the committee was expected to unveil its charges against Waters before leaving town for the recess.

...

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus have complained that the OCE has unfairly and disproportionately targeted them, and many have signed onto a legislative effort to de-fang the office.

Charlie Rangel's defender's defense of him? Not innocence, of course. Identity.

One member of the Congressional Black Caucus, also speaking on condition of anonymity, expressed bitterness that the president would turn publicly on Rangel, a decorated Korean War combat veteran.

“Charlie Rangel has served our nation with honor and distinction for more than four decades — before I was born and the President was a twinkle in his parents’ eye,” the CBC member said of a career in public service dating back to Rangel’s days in the Army.

“He should be treated with honor and respect,” the member said, referring to Rangel’s work promoting equal rights for African Americans. “In fact Mr. Rangel made my service in Congress and Mr. Obama’s presidency possible.”

Ah, he served in the Korean War, and he advanced the black cause, so he deserves "honor and respect." "Honor and respect" apparently defined as a license for lawlessness.

The racial narrative here isn't the unfairness of this. It's that Maxine Waters and Charlie Rangel calculated -- probably correctly -- that they could do pretty much whatever they wanted and break any law they liked and skate by for it, because identity politics means they have a license to break the law as they see fit, and Whitey is too scared to do a thing about it.

Rather than take some sort of minor penalty, they're demanding trials, calculating, again probably correctly, that they can play the Race Card and get acquitted.

And this, of course, will somehow wind up being painted as racist by their accusers.

Is it racist to judge these bastards by the corruption of their characters rather than the color of their skin?

Ah well, maybe someday. I have a dream.

Posted by: Ace at 09:15 AM | Comments (171)
Post contains 437 words, total size 3 kb.

Allah recently began to despair over the Rubio race. Not only is Crist leading as it is, but an upstart -- white -- Democrat is threatening to beat the assumed nominee, Meeks.

In the race for the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate, businessman Jeff Greene has jumped to a 33 – 23 percent lead over U.S. Rep. Kendrick Meek, with former Miami Mayor Maurice Ferre at 4 percent. But 35 percent are undecided and 54 percent of those who name a candidate say they might change their mind…

“If there was any doubt that enough money can make a political unknown into a front- runner, the Democratic Senate primary and the Republican primary for governor should lay them to rest,” said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

And Crist is popular enough with blacks that his allies refer to him (apparently with straight faces) as the state's "first African-American governor," though I didn't know that orange was the new black.

So: If Greene actually beats Meeks, then Greene doesn't take all those Democratic black votes with him. Instead, they go to... Crist.

And that's what a PPP poll confirms.

Just how good would it be for Charlie Crist if Jeff Greene won the Democratic nomination for the Senate in Florida? Our poll of the state a couple weeks ago found that among people who would vote for Kendrick Meek if he was the Democratic nominee only 32% would vote for Greene were he the nominee while 40% would go for Crist with Libertarian Alex Snitker getting 5% and Marco Rubio pulling 4%.

There's a particularly strong disparity with black voters. If Meek is the nominee Crist loses them 39-33. If Greene is the nominee Crist wins them 61-17.

So if Greene manages to win among the hyperpartisan latte liberals that make up the primary, he goes down in crushing defeat, which would usually be a nice thing for us, but here, instead, they turn to the other liberal Democrat in the race, Charlie Crist.

So: I don't know about the rules for declaring partisan affiliation or primary voting in Florida (someone let me know if you do), but it seems to me that Rubio has the nomination locked up six ways 'till Sunday and it's time to declare Democrat and vote for Meeks in the primary.

Vote as if Rubio's senatorship depended on it, because it does.

Posted by: Ace at 07:28 AM | Comments (150)
Post contains 415 words, total size 3 kb.

Of course they did.

After a protracted battle that set off a national debate over the freedom of religion, a Muslim center and mosque to be built two blocks from ground zero surmounted a final hurdle on Tuesday.

The cityÂ’s Landmarks Preservation Commission voted 9-0 against granting historic protection to the building at 45-47 Park Place in Lower Manhattan, where the $100 million center would be built.

That decision clears the way for the construction of Park51, a tower of as many as 15 stories that will house a mosque, a 500-seat auditorium, and a pool. Its leaders say it will be modeled on the Y.M.C.A. and Jewish Community Center in Manhattan.

It's been amazing watching the liberal punditry prance and preen over this issue. I imagine more than one arm has been broken by a smug columnist trying to pat themselves on the back for their exquisite moral superiority and tolerance.
It's fits nicely with the goal of far too many people, not just liberals (hello, George W. Bush! Ok, not the best example), who want to not only divorce the connection between Islam and the terrorists we have been fighting for almost a decade but also to stigmatize anyone who dares to point out this most inconvenient of truths.

Anyone who believes that this project is simply a harmless community project designed to build bridges between Muslims and non-Muslims is either a fool or a useful idiot.

If you really want to reach out to others, one of the first rules is you don't do it in a way that is provocative and insulting to the people you allegedly are trying to come together with. Very often activists hide their activism in the gauzy, politically correct language of 'out reach' and 'tolerance' but their actions are anything but.

Picking the location of Islamic terror's greatest victory on US soil as a place for 'community out reach' is nothing but a slap in the face. Of course good liberals who are always quick to find fault with the US and to revel when our President apologizes for our supposed shortcomings are all to happy to say, "Thank you sir! May I please have another?"

When it comes to outreach and inter-faith harmony, wouldn't the organizers of this center be better off putting their efforts into getting their coreligionists around the world to put some work towards that goal?

How about we end the ban on non-Muslims entering Mecca? Or maybe not make it illegal for Christians to do missionary work in Muslim nations?

I'm not advocating that we sink to the level of these backward nations. No one is denying the organizers of the Ground Zero mosque project have a legal right to do what they are doing. I'm simply saying, if you're goal is to really enhance understanding between Muslims and non-Muslims, there are a lot better ways to do it and places more in need of it than the area around the World Trade Center.

Now, if you're goal is to do something else, like take a victory lap....well, they couldn't have picked a better location.

Added: Two plead guilty in plan to attack JFK Airport.

It's just a reminder that NYC has been under repeated attack by Islamic inspired terrorists for well over a 10 years and yet there's been no hunting down of Muslims, no burning down their places of worship, nothing but a constant fretting over a backlash that never actually comes. Yet, it's NYC that needs lessons in tolerance from the Cordoba House organizers and the liberal chattering class.

JFK story via Gabe.

Posted by: DrewM at 07:22 AM | Comments (188)
Post contains 622 words, total size 4 kb.