I'll bet he does.

Retreat, declare victory, and pick up another Nobel Peace Prize on your way to the 19th Hole.

President Obama said Syria’s offer to place its chemical weapons under international controls is a “significant” and a “potentially positive development.”

Obama in an interview with NBC News said the offer had to be taken “with a grain of salt” given Syria’s behavior, but also said it would be scrutinized seriously.

“We are going to run this to ground,” he told NBC in one of six network interviews he taped Tuesday afternoon.

Yeah and supposedly Kerry's talking to his opposite Russian number about the details, but you know what? They don't care about the details.

They always sought a Symbolic Gesture and this qualifies as a Symbolic Gesture.

And Harry Reid's excited by the Gutsy Call Climbdown, too.

There will be champagne & Spades tonight at the White House.

And in the media, too. The media was struggling carrying Obama's water on this one, and now they can go into their preferred mode of Obama coverage: Ecstatic praise.

Oh, they do enjoy defending Obama, but they much prefer Praising Him For His Genius and Wisdom and Pecs.

For some commentary on the media's current mood, via song, here's Monty Python's "Christmas in Heaven" (Content Warning for Fake Nudity (fake breasts which are really just plastic) and general anti-religious irreverence).

Maybe that YouTube video is what caused all these problems.

Update: Sources say even establishment hand Mitch McConnell is leaning towards a "No" on Syria. So the resolution might be doomed in the Senate, too. Earlier Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), said he'd be voting no.

And, oddly, Michelle Obama casts her own personal vote on Syria: "No." This might just be a bit of an inside-outside game, though, with Michelle Obama, playing the role of Obama's Heart, letting you know his heart is against it, even though his Genius Strategic Mind is for it.

And meanwhile, Susan Rice is back to make all sorts of farfetched claims again.

Posted by: Ace at 02:34 PM | Comments (297)
Post contains 393 words, total size 3 kb.

I want to call him demented, but I have to say, it makes some sense.

Hillary is a strong Democratic contender, though, but... not that strong, really. She's a bit of a paper tigress. I mean, Obama beat her by saying "hope" and "change."

Kerry is of course awful, and of course, sometimes says things so profoundly dumb one is tempted to blame it on liquor. (In case the links don't work there, the post began with Kerry's 2004 statement, "I have five words for America: This is your wake up call" and insisting "I'm so pumped." Some believed he was a little tipsy.)

But who knows. Who knows. Worse things have happened, worse things could happen, and they almost certainly will.

Posted by: Ace at 01:58 PM | Comments (180)
Post contains 154 words, total size 1 kb.

Yeah... she doesn't, and I don't believe she said this. I think she's been put up to saying it.

I keep mentioning this Troll Strategy. The first example of it, at least as far as my own hearing of it, was the Daily Mail's outrageously outrageous Why Women Hate Me For Being Too Beautiful nonsense article, which was accused of being a put-up job for purposes of creating a bus crash that would draw a lot of coverage from the ROFL-copters.

The new victim is a fine looking woman. But she does look 49. Or older. She certainly does not look "too young," and no one could possibly believe such a thing, and no one would possibly claim such a thing.

I don't know whether I should be upset by obvious Carnival Barking or just amused by it. The media has always been a Carnival Barking business; in fact, the first media, as a matter of history, were carnivals. (Caveat: The first media were not carnivals. I don't even know why I said this. This may be the dumbest thing I've ever written and I've written some really dumb things.)

So should we just roll our eyes at Slate and Salon and the Daily Mail and the Washington Post, and thank them for making our days amusing with calculated nonsense?

Or should would be a bit uptight and demand they be better?

I actually don't know. I'm not sure if I should be upset by a Carnival Barker doing some Carnival Barking.

Posted by: Ace at 01:22 PM | Comments (264)
Post contains 292 words, total size 2 kb.

Mm-hm.

#SmartTake.

I think one of the cobs sent this yesterday. Or someone. Maybe it was in the comments. So here's Bill Moyers.

Or it's his website, "Bill Moyers & Company." Some doofus named John Light wrote it.

Drought Helped Spark Syria’s Civil War — Is it One of Many Climate Wars to Come?
September 6, 2013
by John Light

Climate change is already hurting the worldÂ’s most vulnerable populations. Those who live in areas hit hard by drought, severe storms or rising seas and canÂ’t relocate because of economic or social factors bear the brunt of our planetÂ’s increasing volatility.

One way the changing climate has already made itself known is through a devastating drought — and ensuing food shortage — in Syria; it created a powder keg, and played a significant role in sparking the country’s civil war. We can expect to see similar scenarios unfold in the future.

Moyers & Company’s John Light spoke with Francesco Femia, co-founder of the Center for Climate and Security — a think tank with an advisory board consisting of retired military commanders and international affairs experts — about how climate change serves as a “threat multiplier” in volatile regions such as Syria, Egypt and Pakistan, and what America’s role should be in a world in which climate change increasingly exacerbates — and causes — international crises.

This expert goes on to say:

Francesco Femia: Essentially, a massive, five-and-a-half-year drought. From 2006 to 2011, 60 percent of Syria’s land experienced, in the words of one expert, the worst long-term drought and most severe set of crop failures since agricultural civilizations began in the Fertile Crescent many millennia ago. That, on top of natural resource mismanagement by the Assad regime — subsidizing water-intensive wheat and cotton farming and unsustainable irrigation techniques — led to a large amount of devastation.

Eh. If you missed it yesterday, Andy sounded the Alarm Bells over global warming's insidious role in increasing Arctic ice cover by 60%.

Posted by: Ace at 12:41 PM | Comments (185)
Post contains 353 words, total size 3 kb.

This is what you'd call a bad situation.

Incidentally, I missed this -- Shellie pled to twelve months probation for the perjury charge the state was threatening her with. (Regarding a claimed lie about their finances.)

So actually, as far as I know, it's now all clear sailing for these two. They stayed together through the storm and are now separating as the storm clears.

911 Call Already Leaked to TMZ: via the great @danriehl, your public servants have already made a little TMZ cash.

Posted by: Ace at 11:32 AM | Comments (311)
Post contains 131 words, total size 1 kb.

The resolution was 95% likely going down in flames; the KGB might not be what it used to be, but I trust they can still read the newspaper and count to 218.

I wonder what sort of Cuban Missile bargain is being hashed out here.

(Or: Was already hashed out, then played for the public in a bit of Kabuki theater.)

Posted by: Ace at 11:08 AM | Comments (228)
Post contains 95 words, total size 1 kb.

Some are calling this a gaffe-- and I suppose Kerry wasn't directed to say it. American officials are generally directed to say things Which Aren't True.

And he accidentally said something true-- since the chemical weapons are the entire pretext for the bombing, were Syria to voluntarily cede control over them, it would blow up the rationale for the bombing.

America’s top diplomat suggested in a passing remark that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad could avoid a U.S.-led strike if he handed over all his chemical weapons, but the State Department quickly dismissed the comment as more of a “rhetorical argument” than an offer.

In a London news conference this morning, Secretary of State John Kerry responded to a question about whether Assad could do anything to avoid war by saying “he could turn over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week. Turn it over, all of it, without delay and allow a full and total accounting.”

Assad is playing the Saddam Hussein game now of welcoming foreign inspectors.

Did Obama sleep through this episode? Don't tell me; I don't want to know.

The government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on Monday said it welcomed a Russian proposal to avert U.S. military strikes by having Damascus turn over control of its chemical weapons to international monitors.

Whether this was a gaffe or not, is it such a terrible idea?

It's not even a bad idea from Obama's Domestic Policy Strength perspective, which is apparently the only one that really matters. After all, he can credibly say that Syria only agreed to this due to his Smart Power Diplomatic Skill in gathering a Coalition of Nobody At All.

No, seriously: Syria would only agree to this to avert an airstrike. Obama had threatened just that. Ergo Syria's agreement can be read as offering a concession to avoid the wrath of Obama.

That works out for Obama. It also may work out as far as limiting chemical weapons. It works out for "sending a message." It works out for not involving the US in a war that's apparently being made up as they go.

Gaffe, blunder, rhetorical snafu, whatever it is-- it's not a bad outcome.

Again, even for Obama's political position, the only thing that really matters.

This would be a great Festival of Face-Saving for virtually everybody.

For God's Sake, someone might even say something like "Maybe Chuck Hegel's not so dumb after all, hmmm?"

Is it possible that Obama's incompetence has actually worked in his favor? Consider the case of an incompetent setting out on a plan intended to fail.

His incompetence will often make him fail at this plan, and as he failed in his plan to fail, he now... succeeds.

God protects drunks, doesn't he?

This may be the most brilliantly stupid pratfall of all of the Obama Brain Trust's various stupidities.

Of course... This would tend to undermine the Left's idea that #SmartPower #SmartDiplomacy changes nation's behaviors, as this entire scheme would have been brought into existence by the threat of military airstrikes.

But somehow I think Obama and the Left can manage to overlook that as they award each other more Nobel Peace Prizes and Spoken Word Album Grammies.

Posted by: Ace at 10:22 AM | Comments (288)
Post contains 593 words, total size 4 kb.

"Don't worry, it won't hurt, I promise it will be unbelievably small?" Sounds like a Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., pick-up line.

Kerry went on to say that on the Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., scale, the strike would be between a 1 and a 2, somewhere between "deliberately 'accidentally' brushed her bottom as she was moving past" and "shook her hand really hard and got some wave-motion action going up in her bra."

These are our leaders.

This is the New America.

KERRY: I believe that the aftermath of the Iraq experience and Afghanistan left a lot of people saying, we donÂ’t want to see our young people coming back in a body bag and so forth. But thatÂ’s not what we are talking about and what we have to do is make clear to people that this is were not talking about war. We are not going to war. We will not have people at risk in that way. We will be able to hold Bashar Assad accountable without engaging in troops on the ground or any other prolonged effort. In a very limited, very targeted, very short-term effort, that degrades his capacity to deliver chemical weapons without assuming responsibility for SyriaÂ’s civil war. That is exactly what were talking about doing an unbelievably small, limited kind of effort. Now you know that has been engaged in previously on many different occasions.

Great. The world's first officially-announced Symbolic Bombing.

Of course, others are making a different claim. If you'd support this strike upon the promise that it would do nothing, then they'll promise you that.

If you'd support this strike upon the promise that it would do somewhat more than that, then they're willing to make that promise, too.

The strike, as envisioned, would be limited in the number of targets and done within a day or two. It could be completed in one fell swoop with missiles, said one senior official familiar with the weapons involved. A smaller, follow-on strike could be launched if targets arenÂ’t sufficiently damaged.

A second senior official, who has seen the most recent planning, offered this metaphor to describe such a strike: If Assad is eating Cheerios, weÂ’re going to take away his spoon and give him a fork. Will that degrade his ability to eat Cheerios? Yes. Will it deter him? Maybe. But heÂ’ll still be able to eat Cheerios.

Cheerios?

No, my friend. What we're talking about is Kaboom, and I would know.

That does sound to me like the plan is to blow up airplanes, airports, and artillery brigades.

At least some of them. You want to leave him with the ability to eat some Kaboom, after all.

The days of jeering at the Coalition of the Willing -- a coalition of 40+ countries, most of whom contributed tangible aid, troops, supplies, and support personnel -- are long gone.

Here now the Coalition of One.

Or coalition of The One -- I've suggested before that Obama believes he counts as 35+ countries, plus the UN, just in his own person.

[White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough] wouldn’t explicitly admit that the U.S. has no allies willing to provide support, saying, “You’re trying to get me to say that, but I’m not going to say it.” There is specific support from the EU and others, he said, for “holding Syria accountable.”

I think it's pretty obvious that you shouldn't bomb people to "send a message" or to "preserve credibility" or the rest of it. These are very weak reasons to bomb someone. Oftentimes, it's opponents of an action who accuse supporters of it of having no better reason than these symbolic grounds.

But here, the Obama Administration explicitly states its goal is to send a message. A message, apparently, stenciled on a cruise missile.

And it gets worse. In private, aides say this bombing is now about saving Obama's second term, as far as presidential power and his domestic policy agenda.

CHUCK TODD: They're very worried, and if you look at this public relations campaign that's gone on over last 48 hours, and the next 48 hours... They're very concerned, Matt, because it's not just that they believe they need Congress on this and they want to punish Assad and all of the Syria policy, but they realize a loss like this could be politically crippling to him all over Washington, on all the different battles he's got coming in the next six months.

Great. Now we're bombing foreign countries for Amnesty and the EPA, too.

Why put out such a cynical message?

Because, I think, they're counting on the left to respond to such a cynical message. "Support this bombing," they're saying, "so we can win a couple of domestic policy issues that you want."

Fine, Obama. You can bomb Syria.

One restriction, though. Given that this is explicitly a Domestic Policy Bombing, you can't use the United States Armed Forces.

You have to use OFA.

Good news on that front, though: They've got some bombing experience somewhere in there.

Cheerios/Forward and OFA/Cheerio courtesy of @matthops82.

John Kerry/Kaboom courtesy of @bert_huggins.

Posted by: Ace at 09:25 AM | Comments (415)
Post contains 888 words, total size 6 kb.

Ladies and gentlemen, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

Is 10 really intercourse? I'd put that down around 7 myself. You gotta leave some room at the top for the weird stuff.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. grappled with what he called his biggest defect — “my lust demons” — while keeping a scorecard of more than two dozen conquests, according to his secret diary.

The thick, red journal was found in their home by his wife, Mary Richardson Kennedy, who, distraught over their impending divorce and KennedyÂ’s serial philandering, committed suicide last year.

Wonderful. Can we give him some kind of Nobel Prize, too?

A copy of the 398 pages, reviewed by The Post, details RFK Jr.’s daily activities, speeches, political activism and the lives of his six children in the year 2001. But they also record the names of women — with numbers from 1 to 10 next to each entry.

The codes corresponded to sexual acts, with 10 meaning intercourse, Mary told a confidant. There are 37 women named in the ledger, 16 of whom get 10s.

On Nov. 13, 2001, RFK Jr. records a triple play. The separate encounters — coded 10, 3 and 2 — occur the same day he attended a black-tie fund-raiser at the Waldorf-Astoria for Christopher Reeve’s charity, where he sat next to the paralyzed “Superman” star, magician David Blaine and comic Richard Belzer.

In fairness, 2's and 3's are usually just Filner-Type Situations.

It's just absurd to say these people are all touched. Absurd I tells ya.

If you think this is bad, wait until the next shoe drops:

The Paul Krugman
Sex Diaries & Furry Journals

Yiff yiff baby.

Posted by: Ace at 08:49 AM | Comments (278)
Post contains 328 words, total size 2 kb.

Light content warning for profanity, bras worn as tops.

Eh. This is kind of like Feminist Halloween now. Everybody gets dressed up in their Sexy outfits and parades.

Posted by: Ace at 08:28 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 44 words, total size 1 kb.