Many of you may not know this fact about Rhode Island Senator Lincoln Chafee, but prior to inheriting his Senate seat upon the death of his father, John, the younger Chafee was gainfully employed as a blacksmith.

Now, I have no beef with blacksmiths. They are, by and large, hard working folks who provide a service that is of necessity to virtually dozens of people. And once Lincoln Chafee was, like these blacksmiths, a valuable contributor to society too. Did you know that a horse he shoed once set the track speed record at Northlands Park, in Edmonton Alberta?

It's a shame that the younger Chafee didn't stick to what he had developed an aptitude for doing in private life. I'm afraid that the duties and responsibilities of being a United States Senator will always be beyond his meager abilities, his degrees from Brown University and the Montana State University Horseshooing School in Bozeman, Montana, notwithstanding. As it stands now, rather than contribute to society, I fear that Chafee the Younger actually sucks value from it.

Or maybe he just sucks. Six of one, half a dozen of the other, really.

Courtesy of National Review's "Sixers" blog, here is the latest example of Chafee buffoonery: he is holding up the confirmation of acting U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton.

I don't know when the last time the Distinguished Gentleman from Rhode Island made himself a set of plate mail armor, but I'm thinking he's gonna want a new suit when John Bolton's moustache hears about this. At a bare minimum, he's going to want to invest in a new undercoating.

What has Mr. Chafee so perturbed? Apparently, over the course of the last year, Ambassador Bolton hasn't answered some of the good Senator's questions. Of course, what these questions are, nobody knows, since Chafee hadn't bothered to alert anyone to his problems until the confirmation hearing was called.

You've had a year, Linc, getting a letter out was too demanding for you? The alphabet got too many letters for you to handle all at one time?

In any event, the former blacksmith has shown that he still has a way with metal. His recent actions have made such GOP stalwarts as Chuck Hagel and George Voinovich look like veritable "Men of Steel."

Posted by: Ace at 09:40 PM | Comments (14)
Post contains 398 words, total size 3 kb.

This is more along the lines of a Dave @ Garfield Ridge post, except there's no bloodshed.

The video shows a kid Surfing on his car while it's going down the street with no driver. As luck would have it, an enterprising criminal seizes the opportunity for a free ride.
Seriously, the gayest part of this whole video is the kid shouting "Whooo".
It's the same sound Dave in Texas makes when he does a cannonball in his new pool.
I think it's legit. What do you think?

Posted by: Ace at 08:34 PM | Comments (12)
Post contains 94 words, total size 1 kb.

Seriously.

Honestly. Fair warning: the first few rows are considered a "bloodspatter" zone.

Who's goin'?

I'm not. Because a musical version of anything sucks. They could do a musical about Kate Winslet giving me a wettie-- it would be awful and I would walk out before intermission.

Posted by: Ace at 07:34 PM | Comments (7)
Post contains 55 words, total size 1 kb.

Story here.

H/T: Drudge.

Posted by: Ace at 05:29 PM | Comments (36)
Post contains 14 words, total size 1 kb.

Pricks. It's about time.

Posted by: Ace at 04:47 PM | Comments (20)
Post contains 16 words, total size 1 kb.

Terrific stuff from Texas Rainmaker. Not sure if the film depicts these events precisely accurately, as I haven't seen it. But damning stuff.

It does not seem now that the film depicts something fictitious -- soldiers about to bust in Osama's door. Rather, it depicts the CIA getting targeting information on bin Ladin and Berger refusing to give the go order-- something that did happen. (See Rainmaker's cites.) Update: I may have this wrong. See update at end.

That's from Mary Katherine Ham's excellent round-up of the controversy.

Earlier I said that when someone makes an allegation, and the opponent doesn't deny it, it should be taken as true. But that rule applies to the Clintonites too-- so when they make complaints as petty as whining that a scene showing Sandy Berger denying authorization to go after bin Ladin concludes with him slamming down the phone, and they're up in arms that he never slammed down the phone, well, I take that as a tacit admission that the main point is true.

Here's everyone's favorite stooge, Greg Mitchell ("who?") of E&P, whining about the fictitious, possibly defamatory slamming of the phone that wasn't:

That's it? That's what you're up in arms about? Sandy Berger slammed down a phone in an improvised moment in the movie, whereas in real life he had set it down gently after scuttling yet another operation against bin Ladin?

Oh, yeah. I can see now why this movie is nothing but Reichwing Propaganda. They've got slamming phones, for Christ's sake. That's just wrong.

And the liberals have now pulled Scholastic, Inc.'s prepared materials for discussing the film from schools, stating, "we determined that the materials did not meet our high standards for dealing with controversial issue."

Want to see the sorts of outlandish conservative propaganda Scholastic had been pushing on our kids? According to David Brock's Media Matters, here are the very serious charges against the materials.

The ABC/Scholastic "Student Resource Sheet 1" omits key information, resulting in a distorted account of pre-Iraq war WMD capabilities; misleadingly suggests a tie between Iraq and 9-11; and minimizes the current role of coalition troops in the country.

While providing background information to assist viewers in "becom[ing] familiar with the people, places, and organizations that played a role in the events of 9/11 and those that led up to that tragic day," the resource sheet asserts that prior to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, "

he U.S. government believed that [Saddam] Hussein had been developing weapons of mass destruction that he planned to use against American and other targets." But the material omits any mention of the fact that, as we now know, Iraq did not have WMDs. Nor is there any mention of the voluminous and growing body of evidence that indicates that the Bush administration knew, prior to the 2003 invasion, that its claims about WMDs were unsupported.

As Media Matters has repeatedly noted, at least three different U.S. or U.K. government-sanctioned reports have found that, before the invasion, Saddam was not in possession of illegal WMDs and did not have an active chemical, biological, or nuclear WMD program. Further, as Media Matters has documented (here, here, and here), over the past year and a half, substantial evidence has emerged that the Bush administration dismissed clear-cut evidence undermining President Bush's central case for war -- that Saddam possessed WMDs -- evidence that the media have largely ignored.

The material also appears to suggest a link between Iraq and 9-11, by both apparently including Iraq as a "place[] ... that played a role in the events of 9/11," and by later tying Iraq to the "War on Terror." The resource sheet stated:

As part of the "War on Terror," President Bush has led the United States into Afghanistan and Iraq and reorganized the national government in an attempt to combat terrorist activity.

In fact, even Bush -- despite repeated suggestions by Bush himself and other administration members of a link between Iraq and 9-11 -- acknowledges that Iraq had no connection to the 9-11 terrorist attacks. During an August 21 press conference, Bush was specifically asked: "What did Iraq have to do with ...

he attack on the World Trade Center?" He replied: "Nothing."

Further, the ABC/Scholastic guide downplays the level of violence still reportedly present in Iraq, noting only that "coalition forces still maintain a presence in the country, battling insurgents who want the United States to pull out." In fact, the Pentagon has noted that violence in Iraq is actually increasing and largely along sectarian lines.

It seems to me that Media Matters, and liberals generally, are arguing with facts (like the fact that Bush believed Iraq had WMDs, a did Clinton and Gore) and demanding that their leftist spin be used in its place.

What will Scholastic offer in place of these materials?

The new guide clearly states that Scholastic had no involvement with developing the ABC docudrama, and that the company is not promoting the program, but that the program can provide a springboard to discussion about the issues leading up to 9/11, terrorism and the Middle East. The guide will focus on three issues:

1. Media Literacy - what is a docudrama; how does it differ from a documentary; what are the differences between factual reporting and a dramatization?

2. Background to 9/11 - what are some of the causes of unrest in the Middle East and other parts of the world that give rise to attacks on the U.S. and other countries?

3. Geography and Culture -- there is a long history of conflict in the Middle East. How well do students understand each of the countries involved and what influences their behavior?

In other words, 1, don't believe anything bad this movie says about Clinton, 2, why do they hate us, and 3, why do we deserve it?

Un. Fucking. Beleivable.

Update: I'm emailing with a guest blogger at Patterico's, Justin Levine, who's seen the movie, to find out precisely what the contentious scene shows. He says there ARE operatives shown near the house, but I'm not clear if those are recon/target-painting operatives to assist a cruise missile strike or soldiers there to kill bin Ladin themselves.

If it's the former, or even if it's ambiguous, then the scene is accurate enough.

Posted by: Ace at 04:18 PM | Comments (43)
Post contains 1063 words, total size 7 kb.

It's true. Your teenage kids really don't give a rat's ass about you.

Sara Goudarzi, LiveScience Staff Writer

LiveScience.com

1 hour, 54 minutes ago

If you ever sense that your teenager is not taking your feelings into account, it's probably because they're just incapable of doing so.

The area of the brain associated with higher-level thinking, empathy, and guilt is underused by teenagers, reports a new study. When considering an action, the teenage medial prefrontal cortex, located in front of the brain, just doesn't get as much action as adults.

You can try whacking them on the medial prefrontal cortex with a big stick. That usually gets their attention.

In the study, teens and adults were asked how they would react to certain situations while their brains were being imaged.

Although both adults and teens responded similarly to the questions, their brain activity differed.

The medial prefrontal cortex was much more active in the adults than in the teens. However, the teenagers had much more activity in the superior temporal sulcus, the brain area involved in predicting future actions based on previous ones.

That means they are conniving little bastards.

Adults were also much faster at figuring out how their actions would affect themselves and other people.

"We think that a teenager's judgment of what they would do in a given situation is driven by the simple question: 'What would I do?'" Blakemore said. "Adults, on the other hand, ask: 'What would I do, given how I would feel and given how the people around me would feel as a result of my actions?'"

In other words, teenagers are reckless and stupid.

Seriously, is there a parent anywhere on the planet with teenage kids who did not already know this?

Study: Why Teens Don't Care

Posted by: Ace at 03:54 PM | Comments (20)
Post contains 311 words, total size 2 kb.

Well, it's been nearly 24 hours since I declared MKH my "perfect woman" and I have yet to elicit a response from her, save for that of an uncomfortable silence which, itself, has only been interrupted by the screaming certainty that a restraining order is in the works.

Which, if I have learned anything from Allah, means that now is not the time to admit defeat. Oh no...now is the time to put my confidence on display and step up my efforts!

So I shall. By writing a poem that expresses the depth and magnitude of my feelings. If she can read this poem, and still ignore me, I will know that it was not meant to be, and will move on. If, on the other hand, she is touched by this poem, then that faint spark exuded by kindred spirits meeting may yet ignite into a blazing inferno of internet romance.

See? How can you read that last sentence and not know that this poem will kick-ass?

Anyway, as my MKH is quite certainly a woman of modesty and virtue, I will put her poem in the extended entry so as to protect her dignity from prying eyes. My dignity was lost the minute I started reading this blog.

I call my work "She Blogs with Elemental Fury". I hope she enjoys it.

UPDATE: The two most beautiful words in the English language? She Noticed.

Thanks to Dawnsblood for the tip. more...

Posted by: Ace at 03:04 PM | Comments (72)
Post contains 559 words, total size 3 kb.

End of the Truther?s

Video and further updates at Hot Air.

Now-- as I was just saying. If Democrats are gung-ho to fight Al Qaeda, why do they want to retreat from the country with the largest, most active, most murderous presence?

Correction: I misread the article orignally, and wrote that the tape also shows the head of Al Qaeda in Iraq. It doesn't. That's a separate tape. I apologize for the gross error.

Thanks to Allah for straightening me out fast.

Thanks to Larwyn.

Posted by: Ace at 01:15 PM | Comments (37)
Post contains 113 words, total size 1 kb.

From my local rag:

An art exhibit at the University of Southern Maine has sparked outrage among police, who said Wednesday that organizers painted an unfair picture of the featured artist, a prison inmate who killed a state trooper.

I think I've found my excuse for the next time the alumni fundraising committee calls looking for money.

At issue is whether it was appropriate to portray Manning, a revolutionary who will spend the rest of his life in prison for committing a spate of bombings and killing a police officer, as a U.S. political prisoner.

I never understand these sorts of arguments. Are they saying that murder is now a political issue? Does that mean we're going to see pro-murder candidates now (If that seems crazy, see Ace's earlier post about Cindy Sheehan and the Green Party dude running for governor in New York)?

Anyway, the local constabulary is, for some reason that escapes me, upset about this:

"Here is a person who created a group that targeted government buildings," George Loder, vice president of the Maine State Trooper Association, said Wednesday. "Here they are being provided a favor by a government-funded school."

And until three years ago, it was a me-funded school. I think the lesson here is don't go to college.

Loder said the theme of the exhibit, "Can't Jail the Spirit," glosses over Manning's violent past.

Yeah, no shit.

Ugh. Let me propose a better title for this turd: "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sucks".

Posted by: AndrewR at 12:14 PM | Comments (17)
Post contains 263 words, total size 2 kb.