If only Truman had had the balls to unleash him and kick those savage yellow bastards back across the Yalu River.

Thanks to Beta Male Prometheus.

Bleg: Need a picture of multiple soldiers, one in foreground and looking straight ahead, for a photoshop. More dramatic and more advertisement-slick the better.

Thanks.

Rick Ellensberg Rates The Russkies -- They're Pussies!

Posted by: Ace at 08:09 PM | Comments (19)
Post contains 97 words, total size 1 kb.

I'm expanding Gutfeld's game a little.

Just Wondering... if Depak Chopra ever does any night-farming.

Posted by: Ace at 07:49 PM | Comments (24)
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.

I'll be live-blogging it.

No I won't.

You can hear what he says just as well as I can.

Troop surge already begun, according to ABCNews, although 90 troops hardly seems like enough to say it's already ongoning.

The architect of the plan speaks to ABCNews.

Really, though, the only military opinion I need on this belongs to none other than General "Stonewald" Greenwald.

Thanks to Riehl World, who has advanced quotes of the speech -- containing a direct threat to Iran.

Bush's Strategy Gets Endorsement From John McCain:

"Would you send more American troops in order to stabilize the situation?" McCain answered "Yes."

During a discussion with NBC's "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert, McCain said he had a strong preference for more international involvement in Iraq, but suggested that given that other countries were unwilling to provide more troops at the time, something more must be done by the U.S. military.

"What I would do is and what I think our country must do in Iraq is take an assessment of where we are. And there has to be a leveling with the American people and with the Congress of the United States as to what is really actually happening there. It's very hard to say what you would do. We need more troops on the ground," he said.

Correction: My bad. John McCain didn't say that.

Nancy Pelosi did, in November 2004.

Thanks to FileItUnder.

Posted by: Ace at 06:02 PM | Comments (101)
Post contains 244 words, total size 2 kb.

Photo taken just outside of Khandahar.

If he looks smug, it's only because he just scored his 32nd confirmed kill on an enemy "insurgent" blogger. He then cackled over his suprise victory over Instapundit at El Alamein, laughing, "I read your book, you son-of-a-bitch! I read your book!!"

He then added, "My book was a New York Times bestseller and my blog has been quoted on the floor of the Senate." Or wait, maybe that was his aide-de-camp Rick Ellensburg.

While Allah chews my ear off with great ideas for photoshops he says "he can't get to yet, because [he's] doing push-ups to get a nice 'pump' going for the Bush speech," it's actually Slublog who does the hard work of sticking a face onto a picture.

But I'm Gay! Prebutting the inevitable response:

Well, doesn't that work out nicely for you then?

Don't Hate The Playa, Hate The Game: Time's Men of the Year -- Gen. Greenwald and his dozen plus military advisors.

(Oh-- scroll down on that, there's a caption that probably won't display in most resolutions unless you free-scroll to the bottom.)

Thanks to Marcus, or Marcushhh, as Dr. Henry Jones Sr. would say.

Posted by: Ace at 05:29 PM | Comments (22)
Post contains 208 words, total size 2 kb.

Here's a link to Right Wing News, quoting the Sybil of the Intertubes:

"As a result, it is now morally indefensible for those who are physically able to do so to advocate a "surge," or even ongoing war in Iraq, without either volunteering to fight or offering a good reason why they are not doing so."

I have asked this a thousand times, and don't expect an answer this time, either.

But I'll give it the ol' college try.

If "reasonable lefties" like Greenwald claim to support the War in Afghanistan, which they also claim is going to hell in a handbasket, why on earth do they not feel compelled to enlist in order to fight in that war, a war which they (supposedly) support?

Chickenhawk? You mean supporting a war you're not offering to actually fight in?

Get thee to Afghanistan, boys.

Or do you have "other priorities" that prevent you from risking your soft white asses to support wars you claim to wish to win?

Letting poor, uneducated black kids and no-account rural whites fight in your place while you conduct CyOps in the 69th Chairborne Rangers/101st Fightin' Keyboardist brigade?

Tut, tut.

There will be no answer to this question, as there is no answer to this question. Excpet, of course, for some sort of idiotic semantic ipse dixit about which wars one is required to fight in in order to have the moral authority to support.

Now, the thing is-- I know Greenwald et al. really don't support the war in Afghanistan, either, and never have.

But they pretend to, in order to keep somewhere within the bounds of reasonable opinion.

So you tell me what's worse. Greenwald claims to support a war -- resulting in the deaths of quite a few Americans -- he actually doesn't support at all.

Glen Ellison Ellensberg Ellers Greenwald:
Courageously serving his second tour in Afghanistan,
albeit in an "over-the-horizon predeployment"
in neighboring Brazil

Willis, Sadly, No! guys, Greenwald (et al.), TRex, etc:

Here is the recruitment link you've all been desperately searching for these past five years. I know it's hard to find; I took a wild guess at "usarmy.com" and by jimminy found it on my first shot.

Now that I've found that recruitment link you've all been so madly googling hither and yon for since 9/11, I imagine I'll be seeing you in full camos within the month.

How many times have you each asserted you were just gung-ho kill-crazy to fight you some terrorists -- real terrorists, Al Qaeda terrorists, the ones actually responsible for 9/11? How many times have you caterwauled we don't have enough troops in Afghanistan to finally get the man you so viscerally hate, Osama bin Ladin?

Osama bin Forgotten? Seems to me you guys have kinda forgotten about him your own selves. Because I have some little-known intel for ya -- he's in the mountains of Northwest Pakistan, just over the border from Afghanistan.

And if you guys want to get the "real terrorists" -- well, seems to me that's the place for you!

Don't be Chickenhawks.

There's fighting in Afghanistan to be done, we need more troops there -- especially world-class tough-guys and super-patriotic American heroes such as yoursleves -- and since you've all lectured us so many times on how that war must be won (redeploy our Iraq troops to the Pakistani border!), I'm sure you will, like the Rangers I know you are deep inside, Lead the Way.

Prebutting The First Idiotic Semantic Ipse Dixit:

"But Afghanistan is a war of necessity, while Iraq is a war of mere choice!!! That's why we don't need to fight in Afghanistan to (pretend to) support that war!"

Ummm... so you're telling me that if a war is one of absolute necessity, that makes it less important for you to support it by actually fighting in it?

Really? Just like elective surgery comes before emergency surgery in medical triage, right?

Expect the rest of the responses to be at this level of sophistic cretinism.

Oh, wait: No, don't expect any responses. They have no responses to this, so they just sort of ignore the question.

Now We'll Speak Their Language! Crude photoshop of Greenwald on the way, I'm told, via the Beta Prometheus.

Posted by: Ace at 04:08 PM | Comments (243)
Post contains 733 words, total size 5 kb.

Well, not really. But they did provide this video in a strangely non-insulting post about this site. (Followed up by a submoronic one which was insulting, albeit ineptly so.)

Thanks, guys!

Posted by: Ace at 04:00 PM | Comments (21)
Post contains 43 words, total size 1 kb.

That last bit rankles. At some point you have to fish or cut bait, don't you?

And he links this from ex-Soxblog, now Hugh Hewitt stooge Dean Barnett:

A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, I wrote about a dinner party Mrs. Soxblog and I held at stately Soxblog manor. One of the guests was a dignified man, about 60 years old, who despite possessing a gentle and gentlemanly manner practically frothed at the mouth with Bush hatred whenever the presidentÂ’s name was mentioned.

Soon the conversation turned to the increasingly difficult struggle in Iraq. His delight over American setbacks was so palpable that I asked him if he wanted us to win in Iraq. He demurred. I repeated the question. After a long pause, he hissed, “I want this country to learn a lesson.”…

t comes as quite an irony that the same people who have spent the past three years belittling “staying the course” now reflexively reject anything that resembles a course correction. They only want surrender, which will serve as an acknowledgement that America has “learned a lesson.”

Well, yeah. The left wants Bush to lose in Iraq as a political repudiation of Republicans, but also simply wants America to lose in Iraq as a "teachable moment" about the limits of hyperpower hegemony.

It's always been this way. They wanted us to lose in Afghanistan, too, and they're not happy to see American power being used against hardcore American-killing Al Qaeda in Somalia, either.

Posted by: Ace at 03:36 PM | Comments (26)
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.

San Fransisco values -- Catch the Fever!

How's this for an only-in-San Francisco story:

Members of the Baker's Dozen, the renowned, all-male a cappella singing group from Yale, are pummeled outside a New Year's Eve party after singing "The Star-Spangled Banner."

The attackers allegedly include graduates from Sacred Heart Cathedral, one of the city's oldest and best-known private schools.

The attack happens outside the home of two prominent San Francisco police officers -- former mayoral bodyguard Reno Rapagnani, now retired, and his wife, Leanna Dawydiak -- who were both accused and later cleared of leaking internal SFPD personnel documents during the Fajitagate debacle.

As if that weren't enough, the dean of Yale College has weighed in, as has one of the victim's fathers, Sharyar Aziz -- a prominent New York banker whose son's jaw was busted in two places. He has not only called the mayor's office and police chief -- he's also retained the law firm Gonzalez (as in former mayoral candidate Matt Gonzalez) and Leigh to keep the heat on the cops and make sure "the individuals behind this heinous assault (are) apprehended."

As Rapagnani tells it, his 19-year-old daughter was hosting a New Year's Eve party at the family's Richmond District home for the Baker's Dozen, who were in town as part of a West Coast tour.

The 16 singers showed up late to the party wearing preppy sport jackets and ties, and launched into "The Star-Spangled Banner."

A couple of uninvited guests started mocking them, and allegedly the words "faggot" and "homo" were tossed -- and so were a couple of punches.

Ah, tolerance.

But witnesses said one of the uninvited guests -- who happens to be the son of a prominent Pacific Heights family -- pulled out his cell phone and said, "I'm 20 deep. My boys are coming."

According to Rapagnani and others, the Yale kids barely made it around the corner when they were intercepted by a van full of young men.

"They were surrounded, then tripped -- and when they were on the ground, they were kicked," Rapagnani said.

According to police reports, the cops arrived about 12:40 a.m. to find 20 people fighting in the street.

To the police, who were out in force to keep a lid on New Year's, it looked like just another drunken brawl.

But according to Rapagnani, "This was not a fight -- it was an attack."

Hey kids, little tip. When your names come out -- and I hope they will -- I would suggest you always travel in your twenty-man fake-tough-guy team.

Because you know what? You're not the only ones with cell-phones or fists, pussies.

Gay Patriot... Thinks it was a gay-bashing attack, based, I guess, on the use of the words "homo" and "faggot."

Granted, there is no report of the thugs using the words "warmonger" or "Chimpy McHitlerburton."

Still, not clear as of yet if this was an anti-American hate crime or an anti-gay hate crime. As my esteemed lefty trolls prove on a daily basis, calling someone a homo is considered an acceptable proxy for a substantive argument against the War in Iraq.

You don't have to be the Amazing Kreskin to figure out that hate-crime charges will be filed in only one of those scenarios, however.

Posted by: Ace at 02:53 PM | Comments (61)
Post contains 571 words, total size 4 kb.

Save your $78 mil for some other high-ticket item, like the PS3 (with one extra controller and the required-but-not-included hi-def cables).

All that money for this?

That's the scary Castle Dracula? There's more Gothic menace emanating from my local Chuck-E-Cheese.

Thanks to Dan Riehl, Master of the Pan Google Flute.

Posted by: Ace at 02:38 PM | Comments (22)
Post contains 56 words, total size 1 kb.

10. "Belligerent bagel-enthusiasts"

9. "Seditious sandal-wearing shekel-changers"

8. "Wailing Wall Wulfovitzian warmongers"

7. "Death-dealing diamond distributors"

6. "Revanchist rug merchants"

5. "Subversive schmatta salesmen"

4. "Hook-nosed harbingers of hawkishness"

3. "Black-bearded bubbies of barbarism"

2. "Satanic Disciples of the Grand Unified Church of Topol from Fiddler on the Roof"

...and the Number One Approved Leftist Euphemism for Jews...

1. TIE: "New York Money Men"
AND
"Neocons"

Posted by: Ace at 02:13 PM | Comments (31)
Post contains 80 words, total size 1 kb.