As the "Roadmap to Peace" seems to be provoking a possible Palestinian civil war, does that mean we should abandon this "quagmire"?

Just curious. I'm not sure why kidnappings in Iraq should be taken as proof that what we're doing is wrong whereas kidnappings in Palestine mean we're on the right track. I'm sure there must be a logical explanation.

Related?: No Dancing In Gaza! Dancing is unIslamic:

VISION of an Islamic society that bans mixed dancing and sternly disapproves of homosexuality has been given by Mahmoud Zahar, the most senior leader of Hamas in Gaza.

After controversies when a Hamas-led council halted a dance festival and Islamist gunmen stopped a rap band performing in Gaza, Dr Zahar defended the enforcement of a strict interpretation of Islam.

“A man holds a woman by the hand and dances with her in front of everyone. Does that serve the national interest?” Dr Zahar said on the Arabic website Elaph. “If so, why have the phenomena of corruption and prostitution become pervasive in recent years?”

Because of successes by Hamas in municipal polls and its likely strong showing in JanuaryÂ’s parliamentary elections, secular Palestinians fear that it will try to impose its ultraconservative vision on them. Its Gaza heartland has no cinemas or bars, yet the West Bank has a brewery and Ramallah restaurants serve wine.

Let's do some internet detective-work here.

FACT: Hamas opposes dancing.

FACT: Three Hamas leaders kidnapped.

QUESTION: Who is the mysterious figure behind the kidnappings? There can only be one answer:

Thank you, Kevin Bacon, for fighting the war for western civilization, and also for your right to dance. I think I'll forgive you for Hollow Man. Maybe even for She's Having a Baby.

Thanks to Nat for the Gaza-dancing tip and the suggestion of a Kevin Bacon joke.

Posted by: Ace at 02:39 PM | Comments (10)
Post contains 317 words, total size 2 kb.

Not really my game. I think I was strongly influenced by George Carlin's comparison of baseball and football as a kid. But someone asked for a thread to discuss this exhibition in sublimated buggery, so here it is.

Posted by: Ace at 02:02 PM | Comments (78)
Post contains 48 words, total size 1 kb.

The Political Teen also has video of the full speech of the President on terrorism.

He expressly names the enemy as "Islamic radicalism," not just "terrorism."

For those who've whined that you can't have a "war" against a "tactic" rather than a genuine named enemy, there, he named the enemy.

And of course Teddy Kennedy howled about it. You see, we can't have a war against an unnamed enemy, but if you name them, it's unduly provocative and it alienates Muslims.

Why Didn't You Hear It? Because the MSM Embargoed It: Powerline notes that the NYT, for example, buried actual quotes from an important speech only after a long rambling introduction about Bush's falling poll numbers and such.

The Anchoress has more links and analysis.

More commentary from Mary Katherine Ham at C-Log.

Posted by: Ace at 01:41 PM | Comments (6)
Post contains 139 words, total size 1 kb.

The son of a bitch really says it. As the left-wing fringe moonbats are the only ones watching him, he panders to their most conspiratorial lunacies.

Watch it. But here's the t'script.

Remarkably enough, Karl Rove's possible legal problems were bookended by two pieces of terror news. Before, came a presidential speech on the war on terror. After, came a supposed terrorist threat to New York's subway system.

Stop what you're thinking. It is just an amazing coincidence. The terrorists just happened to wait to make these threats until there's bad news about the administration that it needs to preempt. Just a coincidence.

First, the speech that preceded it by hours, Mr. Bush returning to the theme of scaring the bejesus out of anybody who will listen, offering what was called a major speech on the war on terror...

I've asked before. I'll ask again. What, precisely, is the dividing line between blogs and the mainstream media?*

* I realize MSNBC only barely rates as such, but forget it, I'm rolling.

Posted by: Ace at 01:37 PM | Comments (11)
Post contains 185 words, total size 1 kb.

Every neighborhood should have a 100-story gold Faberge egg.

An architect's rendering of the Trump tower is seen in this image released by Nakheel Developement Wednesday Oct. 5, 2005. American development and gambling kingpin Donald Trump has formed a joint-venture with Nakheel, a top developer in the UAE, with plans to build real estate projects in the Middle Eastern property market, Nakheel announced Wednesday.

Posted by: LauraW. at 10:28 AM | Comments (37)
Post contains 70 words, total size 1 kb.

There's been a rather silly pro-Miers counterattack out there, endorsed (tacitly) by the indispensible Brit Hume, that much of the resistance to Miers comes from Ivy League conservatives. It's pure snobbery, the counterattack goes, that all these Ivy League grads disdain SMU Law grad Miers.

It's nonsense. I didn't like her just because I'd never heard of her. I'd never heard one person before talk about the intellectual firepower and fidelity to conservative jurisprudence of Harriet Miers. I'd heard that of a lot of people, but never Miers. I didn't even know she wasn't Ivy League until Brit Hume pointed it out.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 10:13 AM | Comments (20)
Post contains 989 words, total size 6 kb.

Uhhh, super-liberal architect of 50's-60's liberal judicial activism Earl Warren or not-terribly-well-respected conservative CJ Warren Burger? The latter, Miers offered, when pressed to clarify.

Jim Lindgren of the Volokh Conspiracy finds either answer troublesome.

Warren Burger, though a doughty conservative, was not a great thinker or jurist like Scalia or, dare I say it, Clarence Thomas. He was overtly political, delighting in loading his opinions with what he called little "stingers" -- bits of politically-charged dicta that were supposed to advance the conservative position. But dicta doesn't really count for all that much in jurisprudence.

He was also known as a bit of gamer, as he would join the majority holding (often liberal) even if he disagreed with it, so he could assign the opinion to himself, and then he would write an opinion in a cramped, narrow fashion, thus limiting the damage, so to speak. I guess I can't fault him too much for that, but it was kinda dirty pool, and I don't think it worked too well as a tactic. Liberal justices citing precedential opinions he penned could just kind of ignore most of his actual opinion and cite the holding. Or cite instead the more expansive concurrences with his opinion penned by actual liberals.

However much liberals hate Scalia, they almost always give the man his props-- his opinions and dissents are absolutely brilliant, brilliant in analysis and often in genuinely-fun-to-read rhetoric. He's a craftsman of both the law and the English language.

Warren Burger, on the other hand, was just a guy on the court.

Sorry, it just doesn't look like Harriet Miers has spent much time reading or thinking about constitutional law.

Thanks to the Blogometer.

Posted by: Ace at 09:40 AM | Comments (84)
Post contains 290 words, total size 2 kb.

Quagmire:

One of the great pieces of information we got recently is 80 percent of the al Qaeda network in the north has been devastated. And those are not our figures, those came from the last six leaders in Mosul, al Qaeda leaders that we captured; they informed us of that. We also had a letter that was captured from Abu Zaid (sp) going to Zarqawi.

We recently killed Zaid (sp) and we had that letter, and it also talked about the desperate situation for the al Qaeda and the insurgents in Mosul and in the north. And then also, sources we have inside the al Qaeda network up here have also informed us of that...

Thanks to cutaway.

Posted by: Ace at 09:21 AM | Comments (27)
Post contains 139 words, total size 1 kb.

10. Must be eager to work with a dynamic group of diverse suicidal maniacs

9. Must be a "self-starter;" also, a "self-detonator"

8. Must be a "people person"

7. Absolutely no prima donnas! Whether it's fetching coffee or sawing off the head of a female schoolteacher, there are no "small tasks" at Al Qaeda, only "small workers"

6. Must have a good "phone voice"

5. Must be willing to relocate to Paradise on 24 hours notice

4. Qualified candidates should have 3-5 years experience with Excel, Java, Quicken, and rocket-propelled grenades

3. Special consideration will be given to any candidate who can fit a complete stinger missile system up his ass (we promise-- no giggling!)

2. Must not have already registered with Kelly Temps

...and the Number One Requirement for Employment With Al Qaeda...

1. Not a requirement but a perk: Every Friday is Hawaiian-Shirt-and-Crazy-Tie Day!!!

Posted by: Ace at 08:49 AM | Comments (18)
Post contains 162 words, total size 1 kb.

Bumped. Contest closes Friday at midnight ET.

Inspired by LaurW, I'm starting an actual contest (yes, there will be winners) for Bad Poetry.

Like pornography, I can't define Bad Poetry, but I know it when I see it. It usually starts with lines like "The empty page mocks me" or shit like that.

Bad Poetry will be judged according to various criteria:

1) In-your-face pretentiousness.

2) Obscure allusions, bad similies, strained metaphors, and "edgy" personifications ("the wheezing sky spits lugies of disdain").

3) Gratuitous mentions of left-wing causes, especially those that are highly dated, like "No nukes" or "In Praise of the Sandanistas."

4) A pathetic, overly-personal, "Too much information" sort of confessional style.

5) Cutesy crap you should have grown out of in eighth grade, like obvious rhymes and writing in all lower-case letters like E. E. Cummings. (Yeah, I capitalized it. Grow up.)

6) General fagginess.

Here's the thing: good Bad Poetry has to be sort of on the level, kind of deadpan. It has to almost be believable as an actual attempt to write a "good" poem. Although there may be a separate category for poems that are just so over-the-top horrible they'll get a special award.

The first nominee is:

Saw a garden, overrun with weeds. I said, not me.
Through Spring I smothered and plucked them.
In Summer my garden was blooming brilliant.
But in the slumberous warmth the weeds got ahead of me.
Have I got the will, in this heat? Oh, let them go to seed
And sleep with me under the snow
Chancing some Spring awakening!

Not In My Name! Yes, you can write a bad poem and attribute it to someone else. Though you'll want to note the actual author if you want a shot at the Ace of Spades prizepool.

Is Flaming Allowed? Of course.

Thanks... To Slublog, who suggested the pretentious factor would be increased twofold if I called it a "Slam!" So I've done so.

Posted by: Ace at 08:33 AM | Comments (295)
Post contains 337 words, total size 2 kb.