There's little doubt that this guy should be considered on a neutral list of "People Who Mattered," whether for good or for ill.

But Time is rather nonjudgmental about a terrorist-supporting, Holocaust-denying, election-rigging, Israel-threatening religious maniac, aren't they?

Sheesh. If only Republicans could get this kind of press from Time.

Thanks to John.

More... In praising Bill and Melinda Gates for their charitable foundation, Time just plum forgets to mention all the money they give for the cause of abortion-rights advocacy.

Why not mention that? Is that not relevant?

Posted by: Ace at 08:12 AM | Comments (5)
Post contains 109 words, total size 1 kb.

Remember way back when, when we were young, and there was some consistency in teams' performances year-to-year? Yeah, it was predictable. But it allowed the folks at Monday Night Football to schedule next year's games knowing that most of them would feature good teams.

In the age of parity and quick trips from worst to first (and vice versa), the Monday Night Game has become as bad as ESPN's old Sunday Night game used to be.

The lame Monday Night Game will move to ESPN. NBC, however, will get a Sunday night game which, for the last seven weeks of the season, they can choose as just weeks ahead of the actual game-- they'll get to take a look at all the Sunday afternoon matchups, choose which is most interesting and features playoff-bound, and select that as their game of the week.

The games would just be moved back a few hours. Fox and CBS would get a number of vetoes, to protect some of the value of their respective NFC/AFC packages.

I don't know if I have the time or interest to bother watching a game of the week any more, but it would be nice to have such a thing offered to me once in a while. Especially when it gets interesting in November.

Posted by: Ace at 09:01 PM | Comments (38)
Post contains 246 words, total size 1 kb.

It's a $950 cocktail with a ruby at the bottom, or, more accurately, a $150 ruby with a $1 cocktail on top of it, plus $799 worth of self-authenticating douchebaggery included at no extra charge.

Thanks to Jake.

Posted by: Ace at 08:43 PM | Comments (23)
Post contains 42 words, total size 1 kb.

...Are drowning.

As the ice pack retreats north in the summer between June and October, the bears must travel between ice floes to continue hunting in areas such as the shallow water of the continental shelf off the Alaskan coast — one of the most food-rich areas in the Arctic.

However, last summer the ice cap receded about 200 miles further north than the average of two decades ago, forcing the bears to undertake far longer voyages between floes.

I think you all know what this means.
Global Warming...
...means more seal meat for us.
Nutritious, chewy seal blubber will finally become affordable for the average family to consume several times per week.

The plummeting price of seal-derivatives will spur economic growth to heights previously unheard of.
Lubricants, medicines, fertilizers, fuel, pie filling.

Its all looking good, people. Very, very good.

Somewhat puzzled by the downcast tone of the article.
Oh well! Gift horse, yadda-yadda.

Posted by: LauraW. at 04:39 PM | Comments (93)
Post contains 159 words, total size 1 kb.

Sorry for the Atrios-like effort today. Bush's speech will again argue that leaving Iraq would give a victory to Al Qaeda.

The most interesting thing to me, for once, will be his delivery. Will we get more of the combative, feisty, even angry Bush we got in his last radio defense? I hope so. It's about time he started acting with the passion of a war president and with contempt for his defeatist critics.

Posted by: Ace at 02:16 PM | Comments (30)
Post contains 80 words, total size 1 kb.

Called, ahem, "Santarchy:"

A group of 40 people dressed in Santa Claus costumes, many of them drunk, rampaged through New Zealand's largest city, robbing stores and assaulting security guards, police said Sunday.

The rampage, dubbed "Santarchy" by local newspapers, began early Saturday afternoon when the men, wearing ill-fitting Santa costumes, threw beer bottles and urinated on cars from an Auckland overpass, said Auckland Central Police spokeswoman Noreen Hegarty.

She said the men then rushed through a central city park, overturning garbage containers, throwing bottles at passing cars and spraying graffiti on buildings.

One man climbed the mooring line of a cruise ship before being ordered down by the captain. Other Santas, objecting when the man was arrested, attacked security staff, Hegarty said.

The remaining Santas entered a downtown convenience store and carried off beer and soft drinks.

"They came in, said 'Merry Christmas' and then helped themselves," store owner Changa Manakynda said.

Christmas Wars, Episode V:
Christmas Strikes Back

It's not wise to fool with Father Christmas.

Thanks to Allah.

Better Tagline: DeeDaGo suggests "Kringlenacht."

Posted by: Ace at 10:30 PM | Comments (16)
Post contains 193 words, total size 1 kb.

Regarding the NSA's "special collections operation:"

Some agency officials wanted nothing to do with the program, apparently fearful of participating in an illegal operation, a former senior Bush administration official said. Before the 2004 election, the official said, some N.S.A. personnel worried that the program might come under scrutiny by Congressional or criminal investigators if Senator John Kerry, the Democratic nominee, was elected president.

Posted by: Ace at 10:18 PM | Comments (12)
Post contains 66 words, total size 1 kb.

And, for that matter, our European friends "investigating" our CIA terrorist flights have known about those all along, too.

Posted by: Ace at 10:04 PM | Comments (10)
Post contains 37 words, total size 1 kb.

But in a good way.

He's outraged about the leftwing media and Democratic Party's unceasing efforts to sabotage this war, and he's firing with two pistols, John Woo Style.

He posts this comment by Steve in Houston:

I believe that the majority of those on the left and a good number of libertarians believe, quite simply, that we aren’t at war; or that if we are, it’s “war” instead of war, and besides, it was based on lies so it really isn’t a war. Also: Halliburton. And anyway, we started it.

With that as an assumption, they then act in ways that are utterly baffling to those of us who believe we are in a war that has many fronts, not all of which are physical.

If you begin with the assumption that, say, the New York Times thinks the war on terror and the war in Iraq are just a bunch of bullshit, then this kind of reporting makes complete and perfect sense. Same with DeanÂ’s and MurthaÂ’s and PelosiÂ’s and KerryÂ’s pronouncements.

ItÂ’s the kind of fundamental difference that IÂ’m afraid can never really be bridged, much like that between pro-choicers and pro-lifers.

It’s going to take another attack for it to perhaps change, but even then, the left and many of the Dems have an out - that Bush obviously put us in greater danger. They’ve already set up the theorem, they’re just waiting for the proof. A little attack, say a mall bombing, would do just fine. If it’s in a Red State, that actually might be better. That might “wake people up” to the real danger to life on Earth.

TheyÂ’ve seen that their constituents can absorb a 9/11-style attack, and theyÂ’ve seen that the victims of such attacks become even more resolute in their hatred of George Bush and Republicans.

If IÂ’m a terrorist, feeling all bummed by my comrades getting greased along the Euphrates, IÂ’m really trying to find a silver lining. Fortunately, the infidels are cooperating:

-- I now no longer need fear any kind of physical coercion; the Dems have basically put me in the same position as Nigel TufnelÂ’s guitar: ItÂ’s never been played. DonÂ’t touch it. DonÂ’t even point. DonÂ’t even look at it.

-- As a potential martyr, I know I wonÂ’t need to comply with a treaty I never signed; I wonÂ’t be incarcerated for much more than a fortnight; I wonÂ’t be returned to my country of origin; and I wonÂ’t be placed in some allahforsaken Caribbean gulag where they pee within 20 feet of my plastic-encased Koran.

-- I also know that if the kufr find my Blackberry, they canÂ’t really do much about checking on my contacts at Harvard and Georgetown. IÂ’ll lose my speed dial to Ahmenedijad (sp?) and Dana MilbankÂ’s (or is it Dana PriestÂ’s?) e-mail address, but I can always rebuild my contacts list.

ItÂ’s great. I get all the benefits of being an American citizen and still get to plot its violent demise.

But the whole post is worth reading in full, expecially the bit about revealing classified information, which -- I hate beating a dead horse, but... -- the left seems to believe it's allowed to do if done with the justifiable intent of subverting America's national security.

He calls for a strong pushback against this vile assumption. How the hell did this ever become an assumption in the first place?

Mr. Bush: Assign a Justice Department prosecutor to begin investigating these leaks and prosecuting all those responsible for them or stand accused of silently aiding and abetting the enemy.

And, Uhh, This? The New York Times and its political wing, the Democratic Party, is very excercised about Bush's impliedly-illegal-and-unconstitutional approval of warrantless eavesdrops, but, see, there's this little detail:

50 USC 1802:

(a)
(1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year[...]

Yes, the approvals being questioned were cases of a foreign speaker and a speaker in America. But plainly these were for the purpose of collecting foreign intelligence.

Some may claim Bush employed a loose reading of the statute, but no one can claim he acted plainly unconstitutionally. An executive would be derelict if he did read his powers as expansively as possible in an era of terroristic warfare.

Posted by: Ace at 01:48 PM | Comments (130)
Post contains 747 words, total size 5 kb.

Democrats all tangled up in Tar Baby Murtha:

A solid majority of Americans oppose immediately pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq, citing as a main reason the desire to finish the job of stabilizing the country, an AP-Ipsos poll found.

Some 57 percent of those surveyed said the U.S. military should stay until Iraq is stabilized, while 36 percent favor an immediate troop withdrawal. A year ago, 71 percent of respondents favored keeping troops in Iraq until it was stabilized.

That's a big drop in support, but the solid majority for victory is still there. Heartening.

Posted by: Ace at 10:22 AM | Comments (20)
Post contains 104 words, total size 1 kb.