Eh, it's not really fat by normal-person standards. But this is pop diva Britney Spears' we're talking about. We pay her (well, I don't, but others do) to work out a few hours a day. She's not keeping her end up, as they say.

I'd stay away from tennis, though. It doesn't seem to be helping Serena Williams any.

Thanks to Nordbuster.

Posted by: Ace at 08:53 AM | Comments (48)
Post contains 80 words, total size 1 kb.

Just to get your blood boiling in light of the remarkable 2 1/2 year sentence for Scooter Libby, bear in mind Sandy Berger walked off with probation, a fine, and a temporary loss of his security clearance (which he'll have back in time to serve Hillary! as NSA), despite lying far more egregiously than Scooter Libby ever dreamed of.

President Clinton designated Berger as his representative to the 9/11 Commission and related hearings, which gave Berger special access to highly classified documents in the National Archives relating to the Clinton Administration's handling of al-Qaeda and similar terror threats. Berger got around rules requiring that the documents only be reviewed with Archives' employees present, purposefully stole documents, destroyed them, and lied about it all. When caught, he first blamed Archives employees for misplacing the documents, then admitted having taken them inadvertently (this is the point at which he cut the plea deal), and finally acknowledged what was obvious from the facts that were emerging - he intentionally removed and destroyed documents.

Justice Department officials who investigated the missing documents initially were persuaded that Berger must, as he claimed, have taken documents by mistake and then destroyed them to avoid having sensitive material in his possession. The plea agreement was based on the assumption that Berger was mishandling classified material - not manhandling it.

Now, however, it is clear that there was nothing innocent or inadvertent in Berger's conduct. He has something to hide and, whatever it is, he was terrified that at least some part of it would come out of a non-criminal hearing before the Bar. With no possible criminal charges to face, he could not have claimed a right against self-incrimination. He could no longer get away with saying that he took documents accidentally, took them only to prepare for up-coming hearings (why, then, take five copies of one memo?), or didn't intend to destroy them. He would, in other words, have had to say more than he has so far.

We don't know with any certainty what is missing, which papers exactly are gone, or what notes - and whose notes - may have been on them. Berger's lawyer asserted that the 9/11 Commission had copies of all the material Berger stole and destroyed. But if that is so, why would Berger risk so much to destroy it and be so keen today on avoiding any real inquiry into what he did?

Ron Cass emphasizes the fact that Berger surrendered his law license rather than answer these questions at a bar inquiry. If he could answer truthfully, why surrender something so precious?

Posted by: Ace at 08:45 AM | Comments (16)
Post contains 446 words, total size 3 kb.

By statute, an Republican must be appointed to replace him.

On the other hand, the statute doesn't require he be replaced by a strong conservative, or one likely to win the seat in an upcoming election.

Correction: Yes it does. If I'd read the statute reproduced at the above link, I'd've seen that the Democoratic governor is required to pick a replacement from a list of three names selected by the state Republican committee. So a strong candidate will, presumably, be appointed.

Then again, this being the GOP, who the hell knows.

Posted by: Ace at 08:35 AM | Comments (9)
Post contains 104 words, total size 1 kb.

Months, that is.

WASHINGTON - Former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby has been sentenced to 30 months in prison for perjury and obstruction of justice in the CIA leak case.

Seems a pretty harsh sentence to me, but I'm not a lawyer. Can anyone from the AoSHQ Legal Department give us a better idea? Is this a slap on the wrist, or reason for the left to break out the champagne and Fitzmas tofurky?

Posted by: Slublog at 08:04 AM | Comments (94)
Post contains 85 words, total size 1 kb.

Former hippies in San Francisco are upset at the riff-raff in their neighborhoods.

"I'm sick of stepping over gangs of kids, only to be told 'Die, yuppie!' A lot of us were flower children, but we grew up," said Robert Shadoian, 58, a retired family therapist. "There are responsibilities in this world you have to meet. You can't be drugged out 24/7 and expect the world to take care of you."

(Carolyn) Mckenna said she was tired of being criticized for the "crime" of owning a home. "Haight-Ashbury is not synonymous with anarchy," she said. "It's not fair to homeowners with their entire net worth tied up here. I'd be disingenuous if I said I wasn't worried about property values."

Spinal Tap has some advice for the grown-up hippies:

Posted by: Slublog at 05:11 AM | Comments (64)
Post contains 136 words, total size 1 kb.

I would guess the CBO's estimate greatly underestimates the impact on illegal immigration, which would likely rise, not decrease at all. But it is helpful to know that the amnesty of 12-30 illegals, plus guest worker visas for an additional 200,000 workers per year, will only reduce further illegal immigrants by a paltry 25%.

At best.

The Senate's immigration bill will only reduce illegal immigration by about 25 percent a year, according to a new Congressional Budget Office report, Stephen Dinan will report Tuesday in The Washington Times.

The bill's new guest-worker program could lead to at least 500,000 more illegal immigrants within a decade, said the report from the CBO, which said in its official cost estimate that it assumes some future temporary workers will overstay their time in the plan, adding up to a half-million by 2017 and 1 million by 2027.

...

CBO's report said the new bill's effects on future illegal immigration were "uncertain." The analysts said past enforcement measures have "historically been relatively ineffective," but said but said new enforcement measures -- extra agents, prosecutors and investigators, fencing and workplace sanctions -- will have some effect.

I don't assume that myself. But it would be nice to genuinely increase enforcement and see what effects it actually might have before granting this massive amnesty, wouldn't it?

Posted by: Ace at 06:56 PM | Comments (64)
Post contains 274 words, total size 2 kb.

Sadly, no, I think. It's going through, the worst the better.

An already bad deal will amost certainly become worse as Democrats and RINOs pump up chain-migration:

Perhaps the one bright spot is that a number of conservative Republican senators who support the bill have made statements suggesting that they want to give themselves "wiggle room" to vote against it if the Senate's open-borders majority acts to make the legislation even more objectionable -- a virtual certainty given the current composition of that chamber. Two of the worst ideas could be voted on as early as tomorrow. One, Senate Amendment 1183, introduced by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, New York Democrat; along with Sens. Chuck Hagel, Nebraska Republican, and Robert Menendez, New Jersey Democrat; would perpetuate and expand the current destructive practice of "chain migration" -- that is allowing someone who has already immigrated to the United States to bring many of his relatives into the United States -- regardless of whether these people can support themselves. Senate Amendment 1194, introduced by Mr. Menendez along with Mrs. Clinton; Sen. Chris Dodd, Connecticut Democrat; and Sens. Barack Obama and Dick Durbin, Illinois Democrats; and Mr. Hagel would reduce the "backlog" of family-sponsored immigration applicants by increasing the number of green cards beyond the 600,000 additional ones agreed to by negotiators of the "compromise" -- who included Mr. Menendez.

Do not be surprised if these amendments are accepted by Sen. Edward Kennedy -- the Massachusetts Democrat whose fingerprints are all over the bill -- and are rammed through the Senate. Then those Republicans who had thought they could vote with Messrs. Bush and Kennedy and spin their way out of trouble with their angry constituents by talking tough about "enforcement" will have an even more difficult political decision to make.

Stanley Kurtz lays out the likely scenarios about what happens next. Do the amendments pass? (Probably, I think.) Okay, now that they've passed and have made a horrible deal even worse, do the bill's Republican supporters still support it on grounds that "it's the best deal we can get"? Probably yes again too.

What the Republicans are holding out for in exchange for this horrible capitulation is a completely meaningless "touchback" provision -- everyone still gets their amnesty, and gets to bring over up to a dozen family members, many of whom will be too young, too old, or too sickly to work to support themselves and will thus do a job many Americans are willing to do (i.e., live off of taxpayer subsidies) -- but it's supposed to appease enforcement-firsters that prior to this bonanza, they have to take a meaningless trip back to their home country before immediately coming back to America.

What the hell is this touchback provision supposed to accomplish? Well, it's supposed to convince you morons (and they must think you're morons, to sell you this crap) that this is 1, not an amnesty bill (we require a two hour bus ride back to Oaxaca!) and 2, we're serious about enforcement (see, we make people take unnecessary bus-trips, that's how tough we are!).

Your GOP in action.

Posted by: Ace at 12:57 PM | Comments (59)
Post contains 551 words, total size 4 kb.

Mother Structural Engineering.

Posted by: Ace at 12:26 PM | Comments (39)
Post contains 25 words, total size 1 kb.

We don't credit AP enough. They have a lot of scoops like this.

Yes, the story does have that "D-La." following his name. But frankly I didn't know what that meant 'til I was in college. I assumed R-La. meant "Represenatative Louisiana." Only later did I figure out the R and D stood for party affiliation.

Let's just say they're not exactly eager to "connect the dots" to fellow Democrats like they were with Tom DeLay et al.

Thanks to sherlock.

Posted by: Ace at 11:51 AM | Comments (34)
Post contains 99 words, total size 1 kb.

First of all, this eerie gif demonstrating that Paris Hilton has one frigging pose.

So what pose did she offer her mugshot copparazzi? Not really a surprise.

I haven't seen someone go for the glamour mugshot since Billy Blaszjowski.

.gif taken from Gossiplist.com, which appears to be defunct now.

Sarah Silverman's Rip on Paris: Mild content warning, and not really funny at all -- just very uncomfortable, as the crowd cheers at Hilton's coming incarceration.

Hilton keeps her composure just slightly better than Glenn Close did at the end of Dangerous Liasons.

Posted by: Ace at 11:33 AM | Comments (73)
Post contains 102 words, total size 2 kb.