Power not only corrupts, the article notes, it exhausts as well:

A small but growing number of ideologues on both sides of the political aisle believe that America is simply too powerful. Some of these ideologues will say so directly; they distrust America, or even detest its culture for being fascistic and/or decadent, and they believe that the world will be a better place if America's prominence diminishes. Others strenuously deny that they want to reduce America's power, but their preferred policies achieve just that goal. If the Democratic response to the war on terror has seemed strangely disjointed, it is because many Democrats do not feel free to say what they truly believe: that America would be a kinder, richer, and safer nation if it relinquished a significant portion of its economic, military, and cultural might. Such a position isn't contemptible, but it is wrong and contrary to the beliefs of most Americans.

So Democrats don't speak it aloud. Instead, they give us policies that undermine American power in the name of American power: an Iraqi policy that favors disengagement over success; a reactive anti-terrorist policy that gives our enemies the permanent advantage of the offensive; and an excessive reliance on international institutions whose members crave nothing more than seizing power and influence in those areas from which America withdraws. The Democrats will never improve their position in national politics until they resolve the obvious conflict between their rhetoric and their actual preferences.

That's what I find galling. The liberals have found that they cannot restrain The American Monster internally, through voting, so they propose all sorts of external checks on our power -- subservience to the UN, adherence to treaties we never signed, the invocation of foreign and international law as binding on the US -- to weaken us.

It's one thing to want an America which is mighty but modest. Reagan and Bush could agree with that principle (in a different era, though).

But liberals, having failed to impose their conception of modesty upon America, now seek the second-best option of making her no longer mighty.

Once in a while a liberal will let the mask slip and expressly admit this. They would like to see a defeat in Iraq, not just as a repudiation on Bush, but as a check against further American interventions. A chastened, defeated America is an America which is Safe For The World.

Once again, one of the most honest, and most abhorrent, quotes from a liberal in recent memory. Gary Kamiya, writing in Salon, about his hopes for an American defeat in the Iraq War, penned shortly after the fall of Baghdad:

I have a confession: I have at times, as the war has unfolded, secretly wished for things to go wrong. Wished for the Iraqis to be more nationalistic, to resist longer. Wished for the Arab world to rise up in rage. Wished for all the things we feared would happen. I'm not alone: A number of serious, intelligent, morally sensitive people who oppose the war have told me they have had identical feelings.
Some of this is merely the result of pettiness--ignoble resentment, partisan hackdom, the desire to be proved right and to prove the likes of Rumsfeld wrong, irritation with the sanitizing, myth-making American media. That part of it I feel guilty about, and disavow. But some of it is something trickier: It's a kind of moral bet-hedging, based on a pessimism not easy to discount, in which one's head and one's heart are at odds.

Many antiwar commentators have argued that once the war started, even those who oppose it must now wish for the quickest, least-bloody victory followed by the maximum possible liberation of the Iraqi people. But there is one argument against this: What if you are convinced that an easy victory will ultimately result in a larger moral negative--four more years of Bush, for example, with attendant disastrous policies, or the betrayal of the Palestinians to eternal occupation, or more imperialist meddling in the Middle East or elsewhere?

Wishing for things to go wrong is the logical corollary of the postulate that the better things go for Bush, the worse they will go for America and the rest of the world.

If liberals can't defeat America on the homefront, they'll just have to assist external rivals (France) and external enemies (Al Qaeda, Sunni insurgents) in accomplishing the mission they're too feckless and weak to do themselves.

Posted by: Ace at 10:40 AM | Comments (100)
Post contains 746 words, total size 5 kb.

The Washington Times reprints the Declaration of Independence.

And, as you eat your roasted corn, celebrate America's ancient appreciation for property ownership and personal profit (or personally bankruptcy) as retold by George Will:

The first important book-length manuscript written in America was "Of Plymouth Plantation," the journal of William Bradford, the colony's governor for nearly 36 years. Not published in full until 1856, it was then avidly read by a nation bent on westward expansion and fearing civil war.

In a section on private versus communal farming, Bradford wrote that in 1623, because of a corn shortage, the colonists "began to think how they might raise" more. After much debate, they abandoned their doctrine, which they brought with them on the Mayflower, that all agriculture should be a collective, community undertaking. It was decided, Bradford wrote, that "they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves." That is, they "assigned to every family a parcel of land," ending communal cultivation of that crop.

"This," Bradford reported, "had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means." Indeed, "the women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression." So began the American recoil from collectivism. Just three years after the settlers came ashore (not at Plymouth Rock, and far from their intended destination, the mouth of the Hudson), they began their ascent to individualism.

So began the harnessing, for the general good, of the fact that human beings are moved, usually and powerfully, by self-interest. So began the unleashing of American energies through freedom -- voluntarism rather than coercion. So began America.

Posted by: Ace at 10:11 AM | Comments (8)
Post contains 324 words, total size 2 kb.

Okay, I have no proof that they're liberals. But I've got a feeling.

Last year, a national real estate Web site named Oak Park one of America's "sexiest" suburbs.

Some now wonder whether a desire to foster that image was a factor in the village board blocking a women's plus-sized clothing store from moving into a new retail building in the heart of its downtown shopping district.

The near west suburb is the target of a recent lawsuit, filed after officials decided Lane Bryant doesn't fit the "kind and quality" of shops desired for the building.

In a downtown known for its trendy shops and clothing stores, Village President David Pope said officials want "a more broad-based retailer" to fill the building rather than one with "a niche market."

Lane Bryant specializes in clothing for women sizes 14 to 28.

Ahem. A retailer specializing in clothing plus-sized women is a "niche market" if one defines a "niche market" as serving "15 to 20 percent of the population."

Mexican restaurants are more of a niche market than that.

"We want to expand the market of people who are going to come downtown and spend dollars at other retailers in that district," Pope said, adding the village is "very interested" in having Lane Bryant come to Oak Park -- just in "a different location."

But RSC & Associates, which has spent millions on the new retail building, says it's curious that the village would allow some women's clothing stores to come downtown, but not others.

Village Trustee Martha Brock, a Lane Bryant shopper, said village leaders "need to have a broader perspective on the type of clientele" desired downtown and to be less concerned about "image."

She said the village's denial "does raise some concerns [because] the clientele of this particular store are mostly on the heavy side," Brock said. "But for the amount of money all women spend on apparel, it would be a disservice to the community to have such a myopic view on things."

Pope said it's "ridiculous" to suggest the denial has anything to do with plus-sized shoppers -- but developer Rich Curto said he's been given no explanation for why Lane Bryant isn't welcome, opening the door for speculation.

Most clothing stores are specialized and serve "niche markets." Are they any vintage clothing stores allowed? Those are niche. So are Victoria's Secrets.

I don't know what the politics are here, exactly, but I'm generally against small clacques of zoning-committee-busybodies who shut out legal, nonpornagraphic sellers in hopes of establishing an "image" than no one really ever voted on.

Zoning committees are necessary, but they seem very vindictive and dictatorial at times. It's like the saying you'd never want to vote for a man for President who actually wanted to be President. Same deal with zoning committees. A bunch of Napoleons with dreams of imposing their idiosyncratic aesthetics on a town, and getting a little payback against anyone who's ever wronged them.

Related, But With Content Warning: Are You About A Size 14?, from SILENCE! Silence of the Lambs: The Musical.

Seriously-- the songs are based on the nastiest bits of dialogue from that movie, so have caution in clicking.

Posted by: Ace at 10:01 AM | Comments (16)
Post contains 547 words, total size 4 kb.

Evidence of a mass death of virtually all animals in Mauritius, over 500 years ago, before the arrival of man, suggests a natural disaster, like a cyclone (?) or flood, nearly wiped them out.

Still, whether their numbers were decimated or not, humans do seem to have put them out of their misery.

And, alas, rats. Rats which stowed away on board ships, and then proceeded to chow down on dodo eggs.

A commentator on Al-Jazeera, reporting the story, referred to rats as "Nature's Little Zionists."

Posted by: Ace at 09:52 AM | Comments (8)
Post contains 96 words, total size 1 kb.

Israel marks 30th anniversary of Raid on Entebbe, the audacious commando op that freed terrorist held in Uganda.

While, perhaps not entirely coincidentally, they plan their next move in the Shalit kidnapping.

"The Entebbe anniversary shows the seriousness with which we attach to freeing our hostages," said Mark Regev, spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry. "I think people holding Israeli hostages today should understand that we will do everything we can to bring about the liberation of hostages and, of course, punish those involved in hostage taking."

The crisis began on June 27, 1976, when it became clear an Air France flight from Tel Aviv to Paris had been hijacked by militants from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine after a stopover in Athens. Following a brief refueling in Libya, the plane continued to its final destination, Uganda.

The terrorists separated out the non-Jews and sent the first group to Paris, recalled former Israeli commando Mookie Betzer, the architect of the rescue operation.

Mossad agents paid clandestine visits to the released hostages, hitting the jackpot with a French-Jewish man who was mistakenly released, Betzer told Ynet, the Web site of the Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot.

The released hostage, a former officer in the French army, was a "serious guy with a phenomenal memory" who supplied information about the hijackers, their positions and their weaponry, Betzer said.

Betzer's operation included airlifting Land Rovers and dozens of paratroopers to Uganda to free the hostages.

Their chances of success were slim, but they had access to the airport's blueprints — provided by the Israeli construction company that had built the terminals — information about the hijackers from the released hostages, and aerial photos taken by a Mossad agent just a few hours before the operation was launched, Betzer said.

Slain in action, Lt. Col. Jonathan (Yoni) Netanyahu — the older brother of former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — became an Israeli icon.

A Frenchman helped? Ah, how the world has changed.

Posted by: Ace at 09:44 AM | Comments (6)
Post contains 340 words, total size 2 kb.

In other words, they'll each give up food for one whole day, which is something actors have to do fairly often to prepare for roles.

Hollywood stars Sean Penn and Susan Sarandon are to join a fast protesting against the Iraq war.

Protestors will each give up food for 24 hours, with the "rolling fast" due to last until International Peace Day on the 21st of September.

The protest has been organised by CodePink, a woman's anti-war group who are concerned at the loss of life on both sides of the Iraq conflict. Other celebrities due to take part include country singer Willie Nelson and actor Danny Glover.

I propose an Ace of Spades HQ rolling fast against dumbshit celebrities, in which each of us will fast for one hour, in succession, to highlight our disapproval of Shanghai Surprise and The Crossing Guard.

I'll start off from 2pm to 3pm. It is my vow that every day I will avoid eating during that hour, except maybe for a light snack, like a roast beef sandwich, in case I get lightheaded.

This is all inspired by Mother Peace's vow to fast for two months, which, not to be a dick, but sort of seemed like a good health choice anyhow.

Just because you're a grieving mother and angry America-hating leftist doesn't mean you have to be dumpy.

Posted by: Ace at 09:35 AM | Comments (39)
Post contains 242 words, total size 2 kb.

So, everyone knew about our SWIFT transactions monitoring?

Really?

I guess these five or six terrorists, then, wanted to be caught.

66% of Americans support prosecuting the media for revealing classified information. The predicate is laid.

Video: The Worm Squirms. Bill Keller says he'd publish the bank surveillance secrets all over again, and continues to defend the indefensible. And of course he continues to insist that, while no Americans knew of the program, and the AQIS deemed it a major page-one scoop, it nevertheless was something all the terrorists knew about.

And the dishonsty continues, with the left claiming that because the Bush Administration talked, GENERALLY, about its attempts to crack down on terrorist financing, of course this opened the door to full exposure of the precise means by which we were tracking money.

Here's a print article about the interview, if you don't want to watch this traitor speak.

Video: Hugh Hewitt rips Eric Lichtblau on Howie Kurtz' show.

Video: Always fun to watch Brit Hume dope-slap the drooling moron Juan Williams.

Still More Video: Dana Priest, confronted with tough questions about the AQIS' revelations, chooses to respond by making irrelevant personal attack about Bill Bennett's gambling addiction.

Powerline parody: AQIS reveals sensitive information back in 1776.

Allah notes that TIME magazine had nothing to do with the recent treason, and yet its managing editor wants in on the "free-speech martyrdom." And here he is, dusting off an old copy of Stuff Jefferson Said, finding that aiding the enemy is the highest form of patriotism.

Oh -- and his job, he says, is "speaking truth to power." But don't let that 68er rallying cry make you suspect he's a leftist.

66%, cocksuckers. 66%. And 84% of Republicans whom, let's face it, are the ones Bush has to please/appease.

Jail-O-Meter:

You little treasonous cocksuckers just may get the martyrdom you so crave. Get ready to start writing your traitor's version of Reflections from a Birmingham Jail.

Scenes From the New Resistance: Liveblogging the protest at the AQIS' DC office.

Stop protesting, guys, and start following them around. Get pictures of whom they meet with.

Posted by: Ace at 12:46 PM | Comments (47)
Post contains 363 words, total size 3 kb.

Hmmm... if there's absolutely no security concerns regarding doing this, I take it Sulzberger, Keller, Lichtblau, and Risen wouldn't mind blogs publishing photos of their homes and addresses? Along with helpful details about the locations of security cameras, right?

It's not as if it's conceivable that a deranged and dangerous person could actually use this information to inflict harm upon the residents therein, right?

The AQIS is playing a dangerous game. If they're setting the rules, it would seem that they have to abide by them as well.

Thanks to max.

Related: The Al Qaeda Intelligence Service Is As Slapdash As The CIA: The NYT reports that Oliver North worked against the contras.

PS, that's not a link to the NYT, but to a comment at LGF. I'm avoiding linking the NYT unless absolutely necessary.

Thanks to DH.

More... The AQIS' top ten hits against the US government.

Posted by: Ace at 10:44 AM | Comments (30)
Post contains 166 words, total size 1 kb.

Good on ya, Joe.

We can't have a Kos-Kid in the Senate.

Posted by: Ace at 10:35 AM | Comments (15)
Post contains 34 words, total size 1 kb.

Gurkinophobia. And Maury Povich is there to help.

Thanks to yls.

Posted by: Ace at 10:22 AM | Comments (5)
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.