Last Sunday, 8 year-old Robert Wood Jr. wandered away from his family while they were on an outing at North Anna Battlefield Park near Richmond, Virginia. He was found yesterday. Alive!

Eight-year-old Robert "Robbie" Wood, Jr. was found alive at approximately 2 p.m. Friday near a quarry about two miles outside of the wooded search area north of Richmond. It is possible that Robert crossed Verdon Road and wound up in the quarry, and that would explain why search crews found little evidence of the boy in the search grids.

A citizen who was not one of the volunteers in the search discovered the boy in what Hanover County Sheriff David Hines called a "creek bed" in the quarry area. He said authorities found him in a fetal position.

Wood was reunited with his family and flown to the hospital in good condition.

We'll likely never know what Robbie did for those six days because he has autism and doesn't speak. What we do know is that Robbie is very, very lucky. These incidents happen pretty regularly with kids like Robbie and there are two typical outcomes: in warm weather they drown, and in cold weather they freeze to death. Robbie got a little of both.

more...

Posted by: andy at 06:15 AM | Comments (77)
Post contains 425 words, total size 4 kb.

I was arguing on Twitter with DaTechGuy about the latest DOMA lawsuit against the DOD---married gay servicemembers are seeking the same spousal benefits for their same-sex spouses that the military provides for opposite-sex spouses of servicemembers---when he thought we should take our discussion to the airwaves this morning.

If you're in range of WCRN 830AM Worcester, MA, you can listen on the radio. Otherwise, you can get it streaming here (click Listen Live).

DaTechGuy's show is from 10AM-12PM Eastern. Today he's also got Jimmie Bise of the Sundries Shack talking about Herman Cain's campaign, Steve Eggleston of No Runny Eggs talking about Wisconsin recalls, and Bob Belvedere of the Camp of the Saints talking about the Occupiers and other news of the week.

I should be on around 11:30ish.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 05:23 AM | Comments (120)
Post contains 151 words, total size 1 kb.

A big load of October global warming is about to drop on the Occupy Wall Street crowd across the northeast.

Heh.

Posted by: DrewM at 04:22 AM | Comments (127)
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.

Heh. Finally a use for a poodle! A zombie trim! I keed, I keed. I like doggehs. Really.

Halloween is nearly here. This is a timely list as you watch scary movies this weekend. 13 Horror Movies And The 'True Stories' They Are Based On.

The Hills Have Eyes: The film is reportedly inspired by the story of Sawney Bean, a Scotsman from the 15th or 16th century. The story goes that Bean was the son of ditch digger who did not want to follow in his father's foot steps. So, as most young men do, he ran away with a girl and holed up in a cave by the sea. Because neither of the cave dwellers worked, they had to make due with ambushing travelers on the road, stealing from them then killing and eating the corpses. Bean and his wife had many children and grand-children all through incest since they never left their cave except to go "shopping".

They reportedly murdered and eat more than 1000 people before they were finally caught by King James, who later went on to write a bible I think. Their punishment was almost as wicked as their crime as the men were sentenced to death by blood loss after having their hands, feet and genitals cut off. The women were forced to watch before they were all burned alive.

It is disputed that this story might be false and only used as Anti-Scot propaganda as it all happened because Sawney Bean would rather kill and eat other people than put in an honest days' work.

Posted by: CDR M at 06:01 PM | Comments (712)
Post contains 877 words, total size 7 kb.

Last night's game, I'm told, was amazing.

Posted by: Ace at 03:35 PM | Comments (804)
Post contains 17 words, total size 1 kb.

Ahem. She's speaking of why the Tea Party supports him, she claims.

But she clearly thinks he "knows his place," too.

Here's a very odd bit of "analysis." The black man we're talking about has been director of a Federal Reserve Bank, a CEO, and now aspires to be President.

That's the "place" he knows he's supposed to be in? He's internalized racism so much, his ego has been so reduced by white racism, his sense of self-worth so diminished, that he now sees himself as the President of the United States of America?

Black men who "know their place" in our society know that place to be Commander in Chief?

I guess we must be doing something wrong, then.

This is why I attribute the belief to her (rather than follow her in ventriloquizing her beliefs into other's mouths). It makes no sense.

She wants to call him an Uncle Tom and/or "uppity" -- incompatible, yes, but she wants to hang some racial slur on him. And she finds that in her own fucking mind.

Not in the Tea Party's mind. And not in Herman Cain's mind, either.

So let me get this straight: The left now feels it can resort to racial slurs against black men it doesn't like by simply claiming the black man's supporters -- you know, the people who like him -- are thinking these obnoxiously racist retrograde thoughts.

Not the person actually uttering the words, who clearly despises Herman Cain! Oh no, not she. It's these other people thinking he's an uppity darky and/or Uncle Tom.

She, the person who despises him, and actually engages in filthy Jim Crow era language, is actually innocent of such thoughts.

Remember, when she calls someone an Uncle Tom or house slave she's really just telling you what other people -- racist Republicans -- are actually thinking.

Update: The Weekly Standard report I got that from (now linked above) tells me she's half-black or something and claims to be "African-American."

That seems not to be accurate -- she considers herself mixed heritage, according to this post.

So, even though she's about as black as the Andover Academy Fall Mixer, I guess she feels she's got a little extra license to toss around some racial language.

Even though there's a bit of a history of lighter-skinned blacks (or "blacks") tossing racial language at darker-skinned blacks.

Spike Lee even made a movie about it. Maybe she should check that out, and watch her mouth.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 02:23 PM | Comments (447)
Post contains 452 words, total size 3 kb.

How bad? The Washington Post is so hacktastic here the NYT is relatively fair and balanced by comparison.

Three excerpts on donations from lobbyists, first from the Washington Examiner, then from the NYT, then the Washington Post.

Examiner:

President Obama doesn't take campaign contributions from lobbyists -- unless you count the owners and CEOs of lobbying firms, corporate vice presidents for government relations, or managing directors for public policy.

Well there's some news. Now the NYT:

Despite a pledge not to take money from lobbyists, President Obama has relied on prominent supporters who are active in the lobbying industry to raise millions of dollars for his re-election bid.

Well! Even the NYT confesses this is newsworthy!

Now, the Washington Post. Enjoy:

K Street is playing an increasingly central role in the 2012 presidential race, as hundreds of lobbyists representing some of the worldÂ’s largest corporations and trade groups pour money into Republican coffers.

Oh, they do get around, eventually, to quickly mentioning a couple of lobbyist donors to Obama. But they only offer the Administration's spin.

...

LaBolt said Johnson [the lobbyist recently hired by the White House] will refrain from any issues involving past clients. 'For years the President has fought to ensure that Washington lobbyists donÂ’t have undue influence over the policymaking process,' LaBolt said in a statement. 'ThereÂ’s no doubt that special interests are pouring contributions into the coffers of our potential opponents and their allies because they believe that large corporations and millionaires and billionaires should get tax cuts instead of the middle class and that Wall Street should be able write its own rules again.'"

So, um, does Obama take money from lobbyists?

According to the Washington Post: No, and if he did, it was just a slip-up.

...

As he did in 2008, Obama has made a point of refusing to accept donations from lobbyists or corporate PACs, and his campaign has repeatedly portrayed Republicans as beholden to Wall Street and other well-funded interests. But Obama faced his own criticism this week after hiring a former corporate lobbyist as a senior campaign adviser.”

...

“Obama’s practice of refusing lobbyist contributions fits into a broader goal of seeking to curb the influence of special interests in Washington. After The Post inquired this week about two lobbyists who gave to the campaign, spokesman Ben LaBolt said the contributions would be returned.”

By the way, you know what would be sweet? If Obama stopped the practice of disabling his Address Verification System in his credit card donation operation to block illegal overseas donations.

Thanks to JohnE.

Posted by: Ace at 12:29 PM | Comments (136)
Post contains 439 words, total size 3 kb.

Credit where credit's due, says Joel Pollack at Big Journalism. more...

Posted by: Ace at 12:13 PM | Comments (71)
Post contains 24 words, total size 1 kb.

A preview of his Sunday column is getting buzz.

Romney, supposedly the Republican most electable next November, is a recidivist reviser of his principles who is not only becoming less electable, he might damage GOP chances of capturing the Senate: Republican successes down the ticket will depend on the energies of the tea party and other conservatives, who will be deflated by a nominee whose blurry profile in caution communicates only calculated trimming. Republicans may have found their Michael Dukakis, a technocratic Massachusetts governor who takes his bearings from ‘data’ ... Has conservatism come so far, surmounting so many obstacles, to settle, at a moment of economic crisis, for THIS?

Another worry I have is that Mitt Romney would be the excuse for a third party challenge from the right, and the people who want that don't need too much in the way of excuse anyway.

Not that I would support that -- I would certainly support Romney and bitterly oppose those who have chosen to give the election to Obama, in hopes of teaching us yet another lesson. (We were already taught several lessons on the Senatorial level.)

But I do fear that as a possibility.

Romney is, as everyone is now saying (and I noted myself a few months ago), running a pure General Election campaign in the primaries. There is something a little admirable about that, in that he's not pandering to the primary electorate, but showing them, presumably, what his fall 2012 campaign will look like, only right now.

But the right wants to be pandered to, and he's giving them nothing.

Posted by: Ace at 11:41 AM | Comments (497)
Post contains 292 words, total size 2 kb.

Awesome to be pondering these sorts of basic questions two months before the Iowa caucus.

The campaign of Herman Cain again worked to clarify his stance on abortion Thursday night after the GOP presidential candidate raised new questions at a Texas campaign stop when he said he was "pro-life, no exceptions."

The "no exceptions" phrase seemed to contradict statements Cain recently made, suggesting abortion rights should be a family's decision when it came to cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother was in danger.

The campaign attempted to spell out his views Thursday in a statement obtained by CNN, but did not address any exceptions.

"I am pro-life, and believe in advancing the culture of life. My record as a pro-life candidate speaks for itself," Cain said in a statement. "Anyone who says differently is simply not telling the truth. Next question."

When pressed by CNN on his position, however, a campaign adviser said Cain follows the same policy used by the George W. Bush administration, which said abortions should be allowed in the instances of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is at stake.

"He has learned more about the issue," including the number of women affected in those instances, the adviser told CNN, explaining Cain's view.

There's nothing wrong with that position, but it is a flip-flop.

But that's not even the problem either.

The problem is that it's goddamned scary that he's only recently "learned more about the issue" and apparently didn't bother to think about the so-called "hard case exceptions" until now.

I guess he pretty much just knows 9-9-9, because he doesn't seem to have given a moment's thought to anything else.

There is a big problem in claiming you Know What's In A Candidate's Heart when it's pretty clear the candidate himself doesn't know.

Posted by: Ace at 10:00 AM | Comments (472)
Post contains 353 words, total size 2 kb.