Scam Hall-of-Famer right here.

A bunch of people in Japan paid a lot of money for sheep, thinking that they were fashionable pet poodles.

Wouldn't the fact that your dog is a strict vegetarian and can't be housebroken kind of tip you off?

One couple said they became suspicious when they took their "dog" to have its claws trimmed and were told it had hooves.

To reiterate: they became suspicious. They had a hunch that something was not quite right about the whole hooves thing. Some misgivings began to crystalllize.

Winner, Japanese Kennel Club Dog Of The Year.

Can't find a picture of a sheep with one of those foofy French poodle-cuts. It's killing me.

Posted by: LauraW. at 07:33 AM | Comments (27)
Post contains 121 words, total size 1 kb.

Yeah, a lot of you "Mittens" (or whatever y'all are calling yourself these days) aren't going to like this post.

Which is fine. I don't like Mitt Romney's plan to deal with Nuclear Deterrence. So that makes us even.

He trotted out a version of this approach at the speech he delivered earlier this year at the National Review shindig in Washington, DC.

In it's newer, more refined version, as described in the article I linked above, time has only served to make a bad idea worse.

Republican Mitt Romney would appoint an ambassador-at-large to prevent nuclear terror if elected president, arguing that avoiding a terrorist attack with unsecured nuclear weapons should take on heightened urgency in the United States.

The Republican candidate, in a speech planned for Thursday night at Yeshiva University in New York, says such a person would have the authority and resources to cross agency and departmental boundaries, ensuring nonproliferation strategies are coordinated at home and abroad.

I'm Mitt Romney. And I want to get tough on terrorists who might use Nukes. How tough?

Ambassador tough.

Does anyone really think this is a good idea? Why the hell do we need a new layer of bureaucracy to deal with this issue? What the hell do the State Department, the Department of Defense, and the nation's Intelligence Agencies do all day? Besides undermine President Bush, that is.

You know, if I was a rogue state, I'd be quaking at the notion of having to meet with an Ambassador confirmed by a "the war is lost" Defeatocratic Senate.

And when the Ambassador's diplomatic trip ended in failure, as it likely would, what next? Will "Give them Hell....or a Protocol Officer" Romney threaten to refer that rogue state to the Security Council to face an ultra-scary UN resolution?

Romney's position strikes me as an incredibly shallow dodge. It's the equivalent of appointing a commission to study an issue and then claiming that, by having done so, you've solved the problem. He knows that there is an issue with nuclear proliferation, that rogue states like Iran are actively seeking to develop a nuclear program, and that there exists the possibility that countries like Russia are seeing their stockpiles sold on the black market.

But he also knows that the one real deterrant available, consisting of an unlimited American response to a WMD attack or an aggressive, military preemption to prevent rogue states/terrorist organizarions from posing a threat to our interests (the Bush Doctrine, anyone?), sounds scary. Might turn off squeemish voters.

So let's give an extra layer of Diplomacy a try. After all, I doubt there will be turf battles which might erupt, or political attempts made to undermine the Ambassador's mission. Don't you?

After all, if Nancy Pelosi will go to Syria to negotiate her own foreign policy program against a sitting President's wishes, she would never think of frustrating an Ambassador's agenda, would she?

The fact of the matter is that America and Americans need not be bashful about asserting it's interests or protecting itself and it's citizenry from nuclear terrorism or nuclear blackmail. To the contrary, what we need is a Cheif Executive who can make the case forcefully and credibly that we will respond unflinchingly with an eye for an eye mentality.

No discussion. No games. No diplomatic niceties exchanged between gasbag Ambassadors. No sound and fury signifying nothing.

And Romney? It looks to me like he has seen a horrible, hypothetical future. And he has pre-emptively flinched.

Nice try Governor. Ask for my vote again after you've grown a spine.

Posted by: Jack M. at 07:39 PM | Comments (54)
Post contains 609 words, total size 4 kb.

It's actually not just a stunt; it's an attempt a multimedia experience/hoax/alternate world fiction.

Is it any good? Ehhhhh... I always kind of like the idea of these things better than the execution. Same here. I was bored by the first "blog" about the year 2022 and the onset of the dark night of fascism (having finally actually landed in America!).

David Ross explains what this is (and, by the way, it's kinda old, but still ongoing):

I've recently been listening to NIN's new CD, "Year Zero". It's a soundtrack to a series of websites, scattered around the Internet, detailing life in what we'd call 2022 AD after Global Warming has shifted the temperate zones northward and drowned the coastal cities. The US Government has bombed Tehran, invaded Syria, arrested a bunch of people and doused the water supply with stupid sauce. It's a general Red State phantasmagoria about what they imagine the Blue States want. And no critics are awarding any points for guessing to whom the song "Capital G" is dedicated.

As an Easter Egg hunt and as a musical experiment, it's interesting enough; as a publicity stunt, based on the sudden spike of NIN shirts around here it seems to be working; as a work of imaginative fiction, it's been done many dozens of times before.

Although, of course, Trent Reznor is very, very scared about the mean Republicans imposing fascism on America, the basic idea is interesting, and, frankly, it's always been the right that's had the most to fear from fascism and totalitarianism; generally the left becomes pretty big supporters of fascism and totalitarianism the moment it sees the chance for payback against their "oppressors."

It's not that they object to fascism in principle; they just want to whine loud enough to make sure they're included when the RSVP's are sent out.

So, while his specific politics may be stupid, hell, it's not like a conservative can't enjoy a creepy dystopian fantasy about American fascism. (And by "enjoy," no, I don't mean "enjoy" as in spanking myself to the idea. Have to note this from the many leftist bloggers who have nothing better to do than monitor the AoSHQ site.)

Is it any good? Well, you can decide. As I said, I was already bored halfway down the first page of the first "blog," but who knows, maybe you'll appreciate it more.

More of the websites connected with this hoax/unconventional "novel" here, as well as some background on how some of the hints and Easter eggs were revealed.

There was a CSI: NY episode just like this -- including the bit about Easter Egg messages/codes on t-shirts. Not sure which came first.

Eh. There's potential in the idea, I guess.

Eeesh... The self-congratulatory impulse of lefties just never, ever ends.

This page notes the answers given by a drug company (recognized by the "Department of Morality" as "Family and Country First Corporation") selling some sort of sedative for the sheeple. You take the on-line quiz and it tells you if you can benefit from the drug.

Most answers, of course, indicate you should take it. But if you score too high, you get these messages:

Scores: 41, 42
Your profile has been submitted to certain government authorities. You may be offered a choice between prison and certain kinds of public service. You will be contacted shortly.

Scores: 39, 40
You have triggered an automatic rapid response. Please wait quietly where you are and surrender to authorities when they arrive. The next few days may not be pleasant. Remember to ask the first responders for fast-acting Prozira "spikes". Generic substitutes are NOT the same! Lawyers, cells, and interrogations are all triggers for anxiety in many people. "Make Them Go Away" - with Prozira.

Scores: 36, 37, 38
Drink the water. Take Prozira. Your life will be better that way. We mean it.

Anyone want to bet you have to pretty much answer in the perfect leftist-conformist way to get that "dreaded" response calling you so independent-thinking you're designated a precrime enemy of the state?

And anyone want to bet against the test being rigged so that sensitive Goth nonconformist uberconformists will have little trouble easily dinging that bell?

This is particularly crude. Not just in terms of how silly it is -- how crudely imagined this dystopia is -- but crude and blatant in flattering the liberal sensibilities of the intended audience.

Surely they realize they're being blantatly, embarrassingly pandered to. Or are they not smart enough to realize that?

Or are they just so big on having their moral vanities stroked they don't care how crude and flagrant the pandering is?

Snark: Hippolytus writes:

This is a step up from the previous NIN easter egg hunts where you listen to one of his albums and count how many times he ripped off his far more talented peers. (Skinny Puppy, RevCo, Numb, Coil, Cabaret Voltaire, etc., etc., etc.)

I'm going to agree 100% with that, because it seems like a pretty hip thing to agree with. Not that I could name a single song by any of those bands.

Posted by: Ace at 04:26 PM | Comments (45)
Post contains 865 words, total size 5 kb.

Is this possible? Could we be rid of Rosie and Alec on the same day?

The interview was granted to, um, Rosie O'Donnell as it turns out, and he says it will be his only one.

Of course, she was defending him the other day with this partly in mind. (The other reason, of course, is that being a liberal, he's above normal considerations of good behavior. His politics are what make him a good person, after all, not his actual choices and actions.)

PUT. THE COFFEE. DOWN.
Coffee is for good daughters.
You call yourself a good daughter, you rude, thoughtless pig?
A, B, C. Always be cellphone-reachable.
Always be cellphone-reachable.

You know what it takes to be a good daughter, Ireland?
It takes brass balls to be a good daughter.
I come from the Home Office. I come from downtown.
Mitch and Maurie sent me here to straighten your ass out,
you thoughtless little pig.

Alec Baldwin's Daughter Ireland Calls Back: Well, if she's this cruel about his horrendous career, no wonder he's so angry.

Thanks to RightWingSparkle.

Posted by: Ace at 02:42 PM | Comments (46)
Post contains 206 words, total size 2 kb.

JackM. tipped me to this, but I wasn't sure how to address it. She outlines ten steps towards fascism, and then claims that Bush has accomplished, or at least set in motion, all ten of them.

It's just a triple decker sandwich of spiced stupid with stupid cheese smothered in stupid-sauce on whole stupid bread with a side of stupid-fries and stupid a la mode for dessert.

The breathless stupidity here is just so dishonest and, um, did I mention stupid?, that I couldn't bring myself to deal with it.

Fortunately, Blue Crab Boulevard treats this with all the seriousness it deserves.

A great line... I'm reminded of the line -- not sure who said it, but they always quote it at NR -- that goes, "Fascism is forever descending upon America, but landing in Europe."

Posted by: Ace at 02:35 PM | Comments (42)
Post contains 174 words, total size 1 kb.

You may laugh, but given the readership of the Huffington Post -- largely clueless, and so pro-gay marriage they're all in favor of marrying gays themselves -- this is a bona fide public service.

Lapsed Leftist brings the Big Funny in suggesting a surefire reason to suspect your husband is gay: "Your name is Arianna Huffington."

The post is inspired by this ABCNews story titled The [Former NJ Governor Jim] McGreevey Effect: Is Your Husband Gay? Here's some sage advice:

It's a larger number than people suspect," said Bonnie Kaye, the author of "Is He Gay? A Checklist of Women Who Wonder."

Kaye says that she has counseled more than 30,000 women who've been married to gay men. "It's been this way forever. The numbers have stayed the same even as the country's attitudes about homosexuality have changed."

And why do so many gay men and women get married? "Because people don't want to be gay," Kaye said. "It's a very hard way to live. Guys who get married are hoping that if they love their wife enough, that love will change their sexuality."

...

The obvious question: Can't you tell that your spouse is gay?

It's not always that easy and there is plenty of denial involved, says Amity Pierce Buxton, the founder of the support group Straight Spouse Network.

...

"The first reaction is shock and disbelief and some relief, because it explains some unspoken problems that seem to be lurking there," she said. "The biggest shock is not the revelation but the fact that they've been betrayed and deceived for so many years."

But what about specifics? How can you actually tell? ABCNews provides a list. Some of these are real; some of these I just made up. In a couple of cases you may have trouble telling the real ones from the fake ones.

In her book, Kaye included "The Gay Husband Checklist," which lists ways for women to detect whether or not their husband is gay:

1. If your husband thinks you are a nymphomaniac or "pushy and aggressive" because you want sex twice a week.

2. If your husband's Netflix queue consists of only four films, constantly rotated and re-watched: Dreamgirls, Mystic Pizza, My Best Friend's Wedding, and Deliverence: The Suppressed "Mountain Love" Cut.

3. If sexual activity steeply declines within the first few years of marriage.

4. If sexual activity with other guys dramatically increases the first few years of marriage.

5. You're always more sexually aggressive than your husband.

6. Your husband prefers "doggy-style" sex, and frequently suggests "Why don't I be the one to get on all fours this time? I worry about your knees giving out."

7. If your husband is turned off by the thought of touching your vaginal area or performing oral sex on you.

8. If your husband is turned off by the thought of you touching his penis or performing oral sex on him, unless you're wearing a mask that looks exactly like Matt "Joey" LeBlanc.

9. If his best friend is gay.

10. If his gay lover is gay.

11. If he hangs out in gay bars.

12. If he hangs out at Starbucks.

13. If he enjoys watching gay porn movies and surfing gay porn Web sites.

14. If he won't shut the fuck up about Lost.

15. If he is excessively homophobic, mocking and imitating other gay men.

16. If he is insufficiently homophobic, and screams "Don't judge me!" everytime you use the expression "lips so plump he could could suck the ugly out of Michael Moore."

17. If he brags about gay men complimenting him on his looks.

18. If he brags about gay men complimenting him on "how sweet he gives it up."

Okay, basically, the odd numbered ones are real -- straight from the ABC article -- and the even numbered ones were fake. Which means that these "subtle hints" were real:

If your husband is turned off by the thought of touching your vaginal area or performing oral sex on you.

If his best friend is gay.

If he hangs out in gay bars.

If he enjoys watching gay porn movies and surfing gay porn Web sites.

Best friend gay -- okay, I can see that one going either way; one of my best buds is a homo. Turned off by cunninglingus? Eh, a lot of guys don't dig that. Who the hell knows what's going on down there. It's like H.R. Geiger giving up ink and canvas to work in the avant-garde medium of Play-Doh and bacon.

But hanging out in gay bars and enjoying watching gay porn and cruising gay websites? We need a book to alert us of these "subtle hints"?

Dear Ace of Spades Advisor,

Lately I've become concerned that my husband may be gay. The other day he said he was going out bowling but by chance I stumbled upon him at a highway rest stop. Literally stumbled upon him. He was writhing around naked on the ground with eight other naked men like a frenzy of copulating snakes. Should I "read anything into this," or just assume it was all maybe due to a bet he lost while bowling?

Sincerely,

Confused in Seattle

Dear Confused in Seattle,

Are you retarded?

Sincerely,

Ace of Spades Advisor

Some more wisdom:

Buxton is skeptical that there are clear signs of gayness.

I think the gay bar and gay porn thing are pretty clear signs.

"Straight men like to cook and decorate and there are gay men who like to do construction work so it's hard to generalize like that."

She went on to add that "straight men like to blow other dudes, and some gay men are all about the 'gina, so again, it's very hard to establish clear 'rules.'"

Another Subtle Clue: Norm MacDonad's special birthday gift.

Thanks to Jack M.

Posted by: Ace at 01:36 PM | Comments (90)
Post contains 996 words, total size 6 kb.

Allah is made more skeptical by the reporter's definitive, triumphalist tone.

As he says, we'll see.

NewsMax, however, can reveal that the facts of what happened early that November morning clearly show that the incident was part of a planned ambush by insurgent forces, that the civilians tragically killed in the were used as human shields by the insurgents, and that despite claims by Rep. John Murtha, there was indeed an ongoing firefight between the Marines and the enemy.

In short, what the intelligence officer provided, was a fully backed up account that puts the listener at the scene of the action and takes him though the entire day's action. All of this information was made available to senior officers up the command ladder including the Battalion commander Lt. Col. Chessani.

It was so complete it eliminated any need for further investigation.

Robert Muise, the Thomas More Law Center attorney who questioned the officer, told NewsMax in a statement, "The intelligence officer is a crucial witness in this case. During his testimony, he effectively described the enemy situation prior to, during, and after the November 19 terrorist attack, providing the necessary context for the decisions that were made as a result. His testimony shows the complexity of the attack this day, the callousness of the terrorists toward the local civilians, whom they use to their advantage, and the error of viewing this incident in a vacuum.

"The officer also showed how the insurgents used allegations of wrongdoing by Marines as propaganda to support their cause. In fact, another witness, who was the assistant intelligence officer during the attack and is now the current intelligence officer for the battalion, testified that since the Haditha incident received so much negative attention, terrorist propaganda alleging law of war violations against American servicemen in Iraq has ‘ballooned.'"

I don't know. That last bit troubles me, because it is, at best, weakly corroborating evidence. And if you've got smoking gun directly exonerating evidence, why would you seek to buttress it with weakly corroborating evidence?

My rule is usually that if someone's offering up something weak like that, it means the rest of what they have is pretty weak too.

Still, here's hoping.

Posted by: Ace at 12:25 PM | Comments (19)
Post contains 397 words, total size 3 kb.

He doesn't seem to agree with Calame's chipper assessment.

The Chronicle, a student newspaper at Duke University, talked to some prominent Times critics, including former public editor Daniel Okrent, to assess the paper's shoddy, slanted coverage of the Duke lacrosse "rape" case in the wake of the three accused players being declared totally innocent of all charges. (Hat-tip Romenesko's Media News.)

"'I think The Times' coverage was heartbreaking,' said Daniel Okrent, who served as the first public editor of The Times from October 2003 to May 2005. 'I understand why they jumped on the story when they did, but it showed everything that's wrong with American journalism.'"

National Journal columnist and former Times reporter Stuart Taylor Jr. told The Chronicle that the controversial 5,600-word lead story August 25 by Duff Wilson and Jonathan Glater was "the worst single piece of journalism I've ever seen in long form in a newspaper."

At the time, Taylor wrote on Slate magazine that the story "highlights every superficial incriminating piece of evidence in the case, selectively omits important exculpatory evidence and reports hotly disputed statements...as if they were established facts."

Chronicle Reporter Iza Wojciechowska: "But The Times' news agenda appeared to support a moral agenda as well, advocating societal lessons emerging from the issues of race, sex and class issues brought to light in the case's early development, said KC Johnson, author of the 'Durham-In-Wonderland' blog that attracted national attention for its coverage of the case. "

Via Newsbusters.

Posted by: Ace at 12:13 PM | Comments (5)
Post contains 279 words, total size 2 kb.

Full episode here.

It's ummm... old. South Park did it! South Park did it!

I guess it's okay, and there are, I'm told, three thousand people left who still think the Simpsons is funny.

The B-plot is about Lisa and soccer. The only thing that could top that wonderful combination -- Lisa and soccer -- is if the episode featured footage from Rosie O'Donnell's latest colonoscopy.

Thanks to Locusts & Honey.

Good Question: The closing line is "Why am I paying $14.95 a month for this?"

I asked myself that after a month of play ago and couldn't come up with a good reason. So I stopped.

Really would have liked to have gotten that horse, though.

Posted by: Ace at 11:50 AM | Comments (19)
Post contains 127 words, total size 1 kb.

And we're living here in Allentown... Note all the "slow" and "cooling" economy talk.

The Dow Jones industrial average shot past 13,000 for the first time Wednesday as stronger-than-expected earnings reports streamed in, suggesting to investors that corporate America is successfully weathering the cooling economy.

The stock market's best-known indicator surged past its latest milestone shortly after trading began, and rose as high as 13,047.31. [It's now higher -- Ace.]

The Dow climbed to a record as many of the country's biggest companies surpassed analysts' first-quarter earnings projections. Among those beating forecasts Wednesday: soft-drink maker PepsiCo Inc., materials manufacturer Corning Inc. and Dow component Boeing Co.

Wall Street got an additional lift from the Commerce Department's report on durable goods last month, which showed a gain in orders of business capital goods and reassured investors that demand for U.S. products remains strong. The department also reported that sales of new homes rebounded slightly in March.

...

The broader Standard & Poor's 500 index rose 10.75, or 0.73 percent, to 1,491.16, after reaching 1,492.31, a six-and-a-half-year high. The technology-dominated Nasdaq composite index advanced 20.22, or 0.80 percent, to 2,544.76, after hitting a six-year high of 2,547.56.

...

Investors have been encouraged by stable earnings growth, which shows that U.S. companies are faring well despite a slow economy.

The economy is cooler than it was -- because it was recently scorching hot, not that the MSM bothered to report on that -- but actually slow? Note the facts recited, grudgingly, in the article -- strong demand for durable goods, rebounding home sales -- belie the article's Big Takeaway that the economy is "slow" and, by implication, only "corporate fat cats and profiteers on misery are making any money."

Which is absurd. One worry about the economy is inflation driven largely by growth in workers' incomes. I guess AP kinda forgot to mention that.

And the absolute moral authority on economic reportage -- the Fed -- calls growth "moderate."

Most parts of the country logged moderate economic growth in the early spring, despite sluggish manufacturing largely due to the housing slump.

The fresh snapshot of the national economy, released Wednesday by the Federal Reserve, found that "manufacturing activity was slow" in many areas and that "residential real estate activity continued to weaken, with sales declining in many districts and flat in a number of others."

Overall, most regions reported "only modest or moderate expansions," the Fed said. There were some exceptions, though. The Minneapolis region reported "firm growth" and the Dallas region characterized economic activity as "moderately strong."

...

On the inflation front, the Fed survey found that "consumer prices remained generally stable, with some districts experiencing only modest price increases."

...

So far, the slowing economy hasn't derailed the jobs market.

The Fed survey found that businesses in most regions reported strong demand for workers, especially for those with certain skills. However, workers for the most part saw modest wage gains, the report said.

...

Economists believe the economy in the January-to-March quarter probably grew at a mediocre pace of around 1.8 percent.

"Modest" and "mediocre" growth is not slow growth.

But I suppose this does represent an improvement in the MSM's coverage of the economy -- after all, when the economy was posting huge 6%+ GDP gains, they claimed we were still in an actual recession for all intents and purposes.

So representing "moderate growth" as a "slow economy" at least is less of distortion.

Of course, partly because the Dems, now being in control of Congress, have a partial investment in the economy, so the media is slightly less aggressive in poor-mouthing it.

Thanks, Nancy!

Posted by: Ace at 11:38 AM | Comments (61)
Post contains 618 words, total size 4 kb.