Recruitment Issues for the U.S. Army
— Ace

By Zelda of The Urban Grind

Apparently, the U.S. Army has been falling short of its recruitment goals.

To what does the MSM attribute the cause of this shortfall?

Many young people and their parents have grown more wary of Army service because of the likelihood of being dispatched on combat tours to Iraq or Afghanistan, opinion polls show. U.S. troops are dying at a rate of two a day in Iraq, more than two years after President Bush declared that major combat operations had ended.

Yup it's always President Bush's fault for dramatically declaring an end to combat operations. But on another note, the troops are still there for a reason. We're still at war. And as sad as it is, soldiers tend to get killed in wars. But these deaths are never reported in the context of all the good that is being accomplished there. It's always just "two more soldiers killed by a bomb yesterday" or something to that effect.

Continue reading...

Posted by: Ace at 06:55 PM | Comments (14)
Post contains 177 words, total size 1 kb.

Mr. Therapist Notices Stuff, Too [The Therapist]
— Ace

Just tooling around the 'sphere:

Basil's over there doing the yeoman's work Matt Drudge used to do.

Right Wing Sparkle thinks the Washington Post would perhaps be more inclined to high-stakes poker.

Cranky Neocon posted this. I just thought you'd find it as whimsical and kind of cool as I did. I've yet to put my finger on the totality of it, however.

I have to admit. Even I have gone too far with this one.

It occured to me just now. The very fact that I cannot even swing the fourth link to other blogs without referencing my own is just sad.

Then something else immediately occured to me. I am also an entertainer in my off time from this stuff--primarily a close-up magician with a comedic moon rising. I know for a fact that abject selflessnenss and the ability to care about the future and vertical mobility of others usually disappear into a narcissistic Bermuda Triangle for entertainers such as myself. But what about the bloggers who do not do what I do on the side? I'd like to hear from one and all on this here.

Are you a narcissist? And does that drive your blogging motivation?

I'd also like to know what Ace thinks about this when he gets back--God bless 'em.

Posted by: Ace at 06:04 PM | Comments (4)
Post contains 226 words, total size 2 kb.

Do You Hate The Commerce Clause? [Dave at Garfield Ridge]
— Ace

If you consider yourself either conservative or libertarian, the Commerce Clause keeps you up at night. The recent Supreme Court decision Gonzales vs. Raich-- you know, the medical ganja one-- was decided on account of that most infernal of jurisprudential reasons, the Commerce Clause.

Friend of the blogosphere Sobekpundit recently had two excellent posts covering the Commerce Clause, both as it applied in Gonzales vs. Raich, as well as the 70+ year history of its abuse.

The problem with the Commerce Clause stems from its convenient flexibility. Need a law to prevent racial discrimination? Rely on the Commerce Clause. Need a law to regulate gun ownership? Rely on the Commerce Clause. Need a law to prevent medical marijuana? Rely on the Commerce Clause.

Unfortunately, using the Commerce Clause as the tool of constitutional reform is like using your butter knife as a screwdriver. It may work in a pinch, but eventually it ruins both your knife AND your screws.

Whenever conservatives have criticized this legal kluge, liberals reply with hysterical reproach, using conservative opposition to the legal mechanism as evidence of conservative opposition to the intended reform. Thus, criticism of the use of the Commerce Clause to justify 1960s civil rights legislation is repeatedly confused with criticism of the purposes of said legislation; a handy excuse for liberals to call conservatives racist.

The truth is that any conservative could highlight a number of constitutional provisions that would better apply to this situation without invoking the Commerce Clause (Section 1 of the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient for civil rights cases, although granted, it says nothing about *private* discrimination). Because, as has proven the case, use of the Commerce Clause has spiraled out of control, far beyond whatever rationale the Founders could possibly have intended for this very basic rule.

Of course, the near-infinite flexibility of the Commerce Clause as it is presently interpreted serves activist liberals very well, because it provides the fundamental principle for the "living Constitution." If anything can be read into the text of the Constitution, then the Constitution does not exist. This may be expedient for the laws that we can all agree are desirable-- such as basic civil rights legislation-- but such an interpretation eviscerates the protection that we require from the laws that everyone but an activist judge can agree is undesirable.

I find myself increasingly wondering-- if I could rewrite the U.S. Constitution today, what would I add? What would I delete? What would I clarify, and what would I obfuscate?

What would *you* do?

---
UPDATE: In Friday's Washington Post ("free" registration required; jerks), Charles Krauthammer wrote about the judicial philosophy of Justice Thomas, including a discussion of the Commerce Clause.

Oh, and Krauthammer writes about it ten times more eloquently than I do. Dammit.

Posted by: Ace at 04:50 PM | Comments (14)
Post contains 476 words, total size 4 kb.

Nerds Make Better Lovers. [Dave at Garfield Ridge]
— Ace

Thanks to reader Compos Mentis for forwarding this NY Daily News story.
And, she insists that a woman who is willing to stick it out with a nerd and get past his quirks will be handsomely rewarded. "Don't give up on him too fast," she said. "If you stick with him, he's going to turn out to be really great."Before I comment, let me clarify that, for the record, "nerd" and "geek" are not synonymous.

My working definition of "dork" is someone who has no viable social skills. A "geek" is a master of trivia and socially-useless skills. A nerd is a sub-genus of geek, a dorky geek.

Anyway, reading this story, the New York Daily News really stretches their definition of geek. Tiger Woods is a geek? Hardly.

But to get to that authentic nerd, chic women have to be willing to embrace their own inner geek and accept the guy for who he is, chess trophies and all. The caveat to mating with a geek, as some dating experts see it, is coming to terms with his less-than-studly looks and less-than-suave demeanor. All thoughts of embarrassment have to go out the window.

Yeah, that's likely to happen. Ever wonder how Tiger got his hot wife? It wasn't because he spends hours a day refining his short game, I can assure you. Money works wonders in increasing the attractiveness of men.

Still, some women are attracted to freakishly bizarre talents, and God bless those few that are. Without these wonderful women, my ability to quote every line from Fletch, flip my tongue 180 degrees, and detail the order of battle for a 1944 panzer division would go unappreciated.

Which got me to thinking-- as a geek myself, what pickup lines would I recommend to other geeks interested in dating beautiful women?
more...

Posted by: Ace at 04:07 PM | Comments (14)
Post contains 447 words, total size 3 kb.

Paul Anka Is On F'ing Fire. [Dave at Garfield Ridge]
— Ace

Earlier this week Ace wrote about Mr. Paul Anka's latest album of swinging covers of rock & roll classics by acts like Van Halen and Billy Idol.

When I first read this I initially thought, "Eh."

Don't get me wrong-- my appreciation for Mr. Anka's prodigious talent is second only to my love for the Jewish Elvis.

But the whole lounge-act-version-of-a-modern-song bit has been done many, many times before, so forgive me for thinking this was nothing special.

However, I just watched the video of Anka kicking it to Nirvana's Smells Like Teen Spirit on Letterman, and my verdict is definitive: he is still one cool cat. Paul Anka is on f'ing fire, all right.

Thanks to Ace of Spades veteran reader Skinbad for the link.

Posted by: Ace at 03:11 PM | Comments (7)
Post contains 138 words, total size 1 kb.

GOP Chairman Walks Out of Meeting. [Dave at Garfield Ridge]
— Ace

WASHINGTON - The Republican chairman walked off with the gavel, leaving Democrats shouting into turned-off microphones at a raucous hearing Friday on the Patriot Act.

The House Judiciary Committee hearing, with the two sides accusing each other of being irresponsible and undemocratic, came as President Bush was urging Congress to renew those sections of the post-Sept. 11 counterterrorism law set to expire in September.

Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., chairman of the panel, abruptly gaveled the meeting to an end and walked out, followed by other Republicans. Sensenbrenner declared that much of the testimony, which veered into debate over the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, was irrelevant.

Read the rest here.

Can you really blame him for shutting down the hearing? This was the *11th* hearing held on the Patriot Act reauthorization. . . since April. How many more hearings are necessary on the legislation?

Are you honestly telling me that, if only Chairman Sensenbrenner had that all-important 12th hearing, Jerry Nadler would be convinced to vote for the Patriot Act? Hell, Nadler couldn't be persuaded to vote for the Patriot Act if it came smothered in eleven herbs and spices.

James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, speaking immediately after Sensenbrenner left, voiced dismay over the proceedings. "I'm troubled about what kind of lesson this gives" to the rest of the world, he told the Democrats remaining in the room.

Always a willing stooge, Zogby thinks that the rest of the world cares at all how the United States House of Representatives holds its hearings. The height of egotism, I think.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, in a statement, said the hearing was an example of Republican abuse of power and she would ask House Speaker Dennis Hastert to order an apology from Sensenbrenner.

Or else what, Nancy? Will you go off in the corner and weep for democracy? Or just continue lecturing us on how "real" Americans display their patriotism?

Stop lecturing us, Nancy, we get it, you're pissed.

The Washington media always entertains me because they treat congressional hearings as serious business when they're political theater at best-- and *bad* political theater at worst. I work with them for a living, trust me: there are no surprises on Capitol Hill.

A hearing is a kabuki dance. The staffers write the questions. The members ask the questions. Every once in a great while, one member or two gets an original thought, but for the most part these things are scripted tighter than a Tarantino flick. Oh, and the witnesses invariably know what they are going to be asked, because the committee staff provides them the questions in advance. You know, to prepare them for the "discussion."

And, in those precious few unscripted moments, the questions are, to be honest, incredibly dumb. What typically happens is the member perks up from his crossword long enough to realize he heard the Secretary of Defense mention Gitmo, so he decides to chime in with his canned rant about Gitmo. . . even if the SECDEF said nothing at all controversial about Gitmo except that there is, indeed, a Gitmo.

Then again, we all know now how the fact that there is a Gitmo is what is most controversial to these critics. What, would they feel better if we held these jihadis in Rikers Island? In Jerry Nadler's fleshy throat-pouch? In the big empty waste where Nancy Pelosi once kept her soul?

Hell, I'm with Sensenbrenner on this one. No more hearings. Nobody's learning anything, nobody is listening, either in Congress or in America. Just hold the damn votes and be done with it.

But "voting" implies "work," so I won't be holding my breath.

---
This posting was made on my personal computer.

Posted by: Ace at 02:50 PM | Comments (6)
Post contains 630 words, total size 4 kb.

Bush Is An Unpopular President [Say Anything]
— Ace

Lets face it folks, Bush is an unpopular President right now. His approval ratings are dismal and have been trending downward for some time. We can argue fine points about media bias and inaccurate polling, but to any reasonable person the fact that Bush simply does not have the favor of most Americans right now is clear.

But why is he so unpopular? The left would have us believe that he's unpopular because the American people are seeing the error of their ways after putting President Bush back in office, but I'm not sure that's entirely accurate.

This country elected the President with a strong majority of both the popular and electoral vote based on an agenda he laid out for us during his campaign. But now that he's in office, what has the President really done to execute that agenda? He has allowed his plans to be "dragged through the mud by obstructionist Democrats," as my one of my blogging partners put it.

So while the President may be on the proverbial "shit list" with the average American, I don't think its because those Americans are thinking that they should have voted Democrat. Instead I think its because the President hasn't been diligent enough in doing the things we put him into office to do.

[Cross posted at Say Anything]

Posted by: Ace at 02:37 PM | Comments (6)
Post contains 226 words, total size 2 kb.

Democrats Crying Over Public Television Funding Cuts
— Ace

From Democrat Frank Lautenberg:

Right. Like Sesame Street, which is a successful children's television institution, needs public funding.

There are a few good shows on public television, but there are some terrible shows too. If funding gets cut the good shows would make the transition (because they're good, and people like them) while the bad shows would get cut.

Where's the problem?

Posted by: Ace at 01:52 PM | Comments (16)
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.

Self Promotion... [Jen @ Demure Thoughts]
— Ace

My weekly Friday Fashion Fabulousness is up and ready for perusal. Click here for an eyeful.

Posted by: Ace at 12:45 PM | Comments (1)
Post contains 20 words, total size 1 kb.

How 'Bout Dem Cowboys? (from BostonIrish)
— Ace

The all-Criminal NFL team.

Lots and lots of Cowboys and Raiders.

Duh.

And OJ. Can't forget the double-murderer OJ.

Sidenote: Could the Cubbies kick more Red Sox-ass today or what? Geeessshh. Just because they haven't won a World Series since before the Titanic was in dry-dock. Jealous much?

Posted by: Ace at 12:37 PM | Comments (6)
Post contains 60 words, total size 1 kb.