Unless, somehow, this can be pinned on Tom DeLay, you'll never hear about this again. So enjoy:

A Democratic fund-raiser involved in Senator Clinton's 2000 campaign has offered a guilty plea to bank fraud charges and is likely to become a government witness at the upcoming federal trial of a top finance aide to Mrs. Clinton, David Rosen, court records obtained by The New York Sun show.

As part of an FBI investigation into alleged campaign finance reporting violations by Mrs. Clinton's campaign, the mystery witness secretly taped a conversation with Mr. Rosen in September 2002 and apparently tried to elicit statements from the former Clinton staffer about financial irregularities involving an August 2000 Hollywood fund-raising event.

...

In the documents reviewed by the Sun, the name of the FBI informant is not disclosed. However, the records offer intriguing clues that suggest the mystery witness operated at the highest echelon of Democratic politics.

"The CW [confidential witness] is related to an extremely prominent and well-known political figure...."

he informant began working with the FBI in July 2002."The CW states that s/he is active in fundraising for the Democratic Party. CW assisted in the U.S. Senate campaign of Hillary Clinton. S/he was involved in the planning of the Clinton Gala," Mr. Smith wrote in January 2003. "The CW is the target of an FBI investigation on unrelated bank fraud charges. S/he has since signed a plea agreement, and has agreed to cooperate in this case.".

A-hem. A relative of a prominent political figure? I don't want to speculate about nefarious doings based on sketchy evidence (I'll leave that to the multiple layers of fact-checking editors at the New York Times), but were any of the, um, usual suspects in Dutch with the law in 2002?

...

A source familiar with the case said the reference to the informant being "related to" a famous politico means there is a familial tie. The source, who asked not to be identified, said the informant is not related to President or Mrs. Clinton.

Damn it all!

Oh, well. It's not like they're the only ones we're out to get. Scandals about Bill Clinton are soooooo 1998, and Hillary! is scandal-proof anyway. All she does is give that little fake stage-laugh when asked about her various shady schemes and the MSM chuckles along with her.

... November 2004 filing indicates the FBI was planning to use the informant in an investigation of "a prominent political figure who may be involved in illegally soliciting foreign nationals to contribute to national political campaigns." The target of the inquiry was suspected of "funneling illegal campaign contributions from foreign nationals to individuals running for federal office."

Democrats? Illegally soliciting contributions from foreigners? That's just crazy-talk, that's what that is.

Posted by: Ace at 07:28 AM | Comments (8)
Post contains 475 words, total size 3 kb.

Sure, a lot of government R&D money gets wasted on some dubious programs.

But if there's even a chance -- a chance! -- that Capuchin monkeys can be trained to assist in SWAT operations, I say give 'em all the jack they need:

Officer Sean Truelove is spearheading the [Mesa Police] department's request to purchase and train a capuchin monkey, considered the second smartest primate to the chimpanzee. The department is seeking about $100,000 in federal grant money to put the idea to use in Mesa SWAT operations...

It has been a little over a year since Truelove filed a grant proposal with the U.S. Department of Defense under the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and he is still waiting for word.

How can this grant proposal be just sat upon, while the government wastes millions of dollars on stuff like, I don't know, Social Security payments for the elderly?

I didn't know how extraodinarily important this was to me until three minutes ago.

But I'll just lay it on the line: I no longer wish to live in a country in which monkeys are not part of our elite law-enforcement forces. Give me my SWAT monkeys or I'm moving to France.*

* I'll be on the same flight as Alec Baldwin.

It's So Crazy It Has To Work Update: Let's not think little-picture, with monkeys being used to open doors and search crawlspaces and that kind of bullshit.

Arm them. Arm these li'l monkey-bastards to the teeth.

Yes, we'll of course see a large number of gunshot-by-monkey tragedies. And for, admittedly, very little benefit at all. But seriously, isn't it worth paying that cost?

In a way, I think people would like being accidentally shot by monkeys. Monkeys are funny; you can't help but smile when you so much as say the word (Son of Nixon's observation, again). Anyone who was shot by a monkey would have a great story to tell, which makes it all worth it.

Unless, you know, that person died. Or lost a limb or an eye or was permanently brain-damaged. Then I guess the story would lose some of its "zing."

And No... This is not the path that led to Planet of the Apes -- they were all used as janitors and stuff -- so don't even try playing that card with me.

The problem in Conquest of the Planet of the Apes is that we didn't give them real responsibility. We treated them like second-class citizens, which was sort of understandable, because they were, you know, monkeys.

But I think if we give them some responsibility, and deadly weapons, they might learn to like us, and then we could peacefully co-exist, as that one chimp in Battle For the Planet of the Apes always envisioned. And then we could team up against the mutants, and Taylor would never have to die.

Posted by: Ace at 06:12 AM | Comments (33)
Post contains 487 words, total size 3 kb.

I'm still very much undecided on civil unions, as I just consider them marriage light or, sorry DL, a backdoor method of obtaining marriage by another name.

Connecticut became the second state in the nation yesterday to create civil unions for gays and lesbians. The move disappointed some gay-rights activists who had hoped to see the state follow Massachusetts' lead in creating same-sex marriage and angered some conservatives who said the measure was a step in the direction of gay nuptials.

The legislation was approved by a wide margin in the Senate and enacted swiftly by Governor M. Jodi Rell, a Republican, late yesterday afternoon.

''I have said all along that I believe in no discrimination of any kind, and I think that this bill accomplishes that, while at the same time preserving the traditional language that a marriage is between a man and a woman," Rell said after signing the bill into law.

The "traditional language." Where would conservatives ever get the idea that this was just a stepping stone towards gay marriage?

But... I am at least very happy that this law was enacted by, get this, actual law-makers 'n stuff.

What a concept:

The measure pushed Connecticut to the forefront of the debate over same-sex unions and made it the first state in the nation to enact civil unions without a court mandate. Vermont created civil unions in 2000 when the state's highest court ordered the Legislature to extend the privileges of marriage to same-sex couples.

Via PetiteDov, who favors this but asks: Why can't a man and a woman have a "civil union" as well? Isn't it likely that the commitment-phobic would turn to marriage-light as an alternative to actual marriage?

This is what gay-marriage advocates studiously refuse to contemplate. In their rush to secure a benefit which will affect quite less than 1% of the population, they simply will not take into consideration the effect redefining marriage will have on 90% of the population.

No This Site Is Not Being Programed By He Who Will Not Be Named Update: Just the way it happens sometimes.

Posted by: Ace at 05:53 AM | Comments (66)
Post contains 364 words, total size 2 kb.

Who's responsible for this gob-smackingly vile photoshop?

You know who.

If You Can't Pithily Express Your Political Opinions On A Bumper Sticker, You're Probably Just Not All That Bright Update: For all the liberals who are shocked, chagrined, and otherwise be-snitted over the election of Benedict XVI as Pope, All Along the Blogtower offers a cool bumper sticker to slap on your Volvo.

Posted by: Ace at 08:09 PM | Comments (24)
Post contains 77 words, total size 1 kb.

It is said the Jews invented guilt, but I think the Catholics perfected it.

Posted by: Ace at 12:29 PM | Comments (24)
Post contains 27 words, total size 1 kb.

On right now. Hurry, if you care.

He's about to link Benedict XVI to Karl Rove-- for real, I understand.

Some Silliness... Michaelangelo was gay, therefore...

There were gay Popes, therefore...

There was no Church policy against homosexuality until the 12th Century, which, He Who Shall Not Be Named points out, is right about the time the Church began blaming the Jews for the death of Christ...

Papal Infallibility was a doctrine invented only in the late nineteenth century...

??? -- Surprising to me. But I sort of trust him to get that right.

From Nick Kronos:

And Rick Santorum (kid you not) is now "a Ratzingerian senator."

Ah, of course. Perhaps he'll start handing out Grand Inquisitor Ratzinger awards, too.

Can I be honest for a moment?

I name-call and I'm snide and nasty and all that. But I'm straight-up about I'm doing.

Someone please explain how this little shrieking ninny isn't doing precisely what I'm doing, except in a more chickenshit "I'm just trying to be civil" manner.

And, of course, I'm funnier. But that goes without saying.

Andrew Sullivan's idea of a joke is... well, that "Gay Batman" cover he did for The New Republic. I don't think I've even heard or read him attempt humor otherwise, unless "gob-smackingly vile" was intended to be "ironical" all along.

Posted by: Ace at 11:47 AM | Comments (48)
Post contains 238 words, total size 1 kb.

It's just too absurd to not be linked.

Whoo-hoo! I'm a d12! How jealous are all of you?

Via Fat Kid.

Posted by: Ace at 09:58 AM | Comments (58)
Post contains 31 words, total size 1 kb.

The always interesting Hugh Hewitt rounds up the reactions from what he terms the Junior Officers in the "Dictatorship of Relativism."

The best of course comes from the Red Star, also known as the Minneanapolis Star Tribune:

Greater roles for women, a more welcoming posture toward gays and lesbians, and a moderation of views on sexuality, genetic research, euthanasia or contraception to prevent AIDS -- none of these is likely to gain ground under Benedict.

I realize these are all important issues about which people feel passionately about. But a Church is not a sovereign democracy in which people get to vote.

Furthermore, I rather doubt that many of this nitwits are even Catholic, or, if they are Catholic, Catholic in anything other than name, so what the hell is all the fuss about?

The fuss, of course, is that the Church is not just a religious institution. It's an institution which exerts great political influence. "Creeping Papery" and all that jazz.

But it is rather revealing that our "diverse" media cannot view a centuries old spiritual institution, concerned primarily with, you know, salvation and God and Jesus and all that stuff, through any other prism but the nakedly political. The Church exists, in their minds, only to either thwart or advance their domestic material-world agendas. It is just an NGO like Amnesty International, only with weird headdresses and censers and subpar wine.

To be fair, as an agnostic and non-Catholic to boot, that's sort of the way I view the Church, deep down. I'm not religious and I never received Communion and frankly it doesn't really matter to me what the Church might have to say about transubstantiation.

But, you know, I'm just a lowly blogger. One would imagine that these idiots could manage at least the pretense of acknowledging the Church as something more than the Red Cross with Latin lessons.

But. They. Can't.

They will blather on forever about making their newsrooms "look more like America" (although, you know, blacks and Hispanics and women are still very underrepresented in the upper levels of power, even in this very "progressive" media industry), and yet they will not deign to bring in persons of strong faith who might temper their secular outlook by suggesting, "You guys do realize we're talking about a Church here, right?"

Churches, at least in America and more civilized parts of the world, are voluntary organizations. You aren't required to be a member of any church (trust me on this: the government hasn't forced me to join one yet, though the Baptists are scouting me and Lutherans have offered me a nice signing bonus), you can leave at any time, and furthermore, you're not ever really required to belive anything they preach to remain a member in good standing.

The left talks a great deal about diversity and freedom. And yet they seem awfully angry about any voluntary institution which stubbornly refuses to accept and promulgate their agenda.

Is there any room in this world for institutions to pursue a non-liberal or non-leftist agenda? It would appear the answer is no, by the MSM's lights. Diversity and freedom are all well and good, so long as your diversity is their "diversity," and you will always be guaranteed the "freedom" to live and worship according to how the liberals and leftists believe is proper.

And, of course: as they believe is "good for America."

Coming: Maureen Dowd explains to us that "Jesus thought he was 'all that,' but he ain'."

Ungreat Minds Think Alike, Too, Update: Jeff Goldstein strikes similar chords.

Posted by: Ace at 09:29 AM | Comments (32)
Post contains 609 words, total size 4 kb.

Rob and Amber's wedding will be televised.

Yes, I will be watching. I didn't watch the Charles-Di or Charles-Camilla weddings, but this one... I don't know. This should actually have class.

And this was on the Amazing Race last night. It is such a gob-smackingly vile line that I would not be a true blogger if I did not share it with you.

Backstory: Some guy -- Ron, maybe? I don't know -- is in the game with his girlfriend, a bubble-headed bitchy beauty queen. Now, the interesting thing about Ron is that he was one of Apache pilots captured after his helo was shot down in the Iraq War. You've seen this guy on videotape, being held by jihadists.

Got that?

So, the teaser for next week goes like this. Beauty Queen says to POW War Hero: "I think you have trouble keeping commitments."

POW: "What are you talking about? I committed myself to the military...."

Beauty Queen: "But you got yourself out of that commitment, didn't you?"

POW: "What? How did I 'get out' of that?"

Beauty Queen: "Well you got yourself captured as a POW, didn't you?"

POW:

POW:

POW:

He just gave her this stunned look. I think everyone in America did.

He got captured and brutalized by the enemy. What a shirker.

Correction: I'm told he was among the crew of an Apache, not a Blackhawk.

I first said "piloted," but then I realized I was just setting myself up for, "No, he was the co-pilot."

So I just went very vague.

Like the MSM, when it doesn't have the facts nailed down.

Posted by: Ace at 08:18 AM | Comments (65)
Post contains 300 words, total size 2 kb.

Jonah Goldberg on the "solipsistic" (hey! That's my five dollar word!) fantasy of American liberals that there's a chance the Church will "reform" itself to validate their lifestyle choices.

He Who Shall Not Be Named will not, in fact, be named. You'll have to settle for subtext.

Goldberg has an interesting quote, which many of you already know about, because while you were researching the Pope's biography and philosophy I was just making cheap jokes about He Who Shall Not Be Named. But if you missed it:

That said, there's still a good lesson for the American right and left to draw from Ratzinger's election. One of the most interesting aspects of his story is that he was, by all accounts, a liberal until the year 1968. But during student riots at Tübingen University, where he was teaching, he looked into the soul of the New Left and saw a deep void. "For so many years," he said in an interview years ago, "the 1968 revolution and the terror created — in the name of Marxist ideas — a radical attack on human freedom and dignity, a deep threat to all that is human."

.... a radical attack on human freedom and dignity, a deep threat to all that is human.

Yeahp, that sounds like Nazi-talk to me.

Pope Polling Update: Sounds goofy to me, but they're asking the right track/wrong track question about the likely direction to which Benedict XVI will lead the Church.

Right direction-- 39% Wrong direction--17%

And how about this for honesty and common sense?

Don't know enough to say-- 47%

The guy's been in office for 24 hours, for crying out loud.

Thanks to KCTrio.

Posted by: Ace at 08:10 AM | Comments (9)
Post contains 298 words, total size 2 kb.