I'm a giver.

Also, I hate it, hate it that the Red Sox didn't make it.

Doggone. Darn. Heck.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 04:38 PM | Comments (51)
Post contains 25 words, total size 1 kb.

Just posting this because I can.

And because it's what you've come to expect from me.

Sweet, sweet expectations.

Posted by: Jack M. at 04:25 PM | Comments (101)
Post contains 31 words, total size 1 kb.

John Galt of Ayn Rand Lane (zip code: a nonexistent 99999) was able to donate with no problem.

Despite the fact that the card holder's name and address do not match the name he provided.

John McCain's website? Rejected the same non-matching-information donation.

I guess when you're gathering up tens of millions from the Saudis and Gazans you have to be a little lenient on matching up credit card donations.

Incidentally-- when I fucking order cheesesteaks from my local deli, I get dinged when I forget my current zip code and give them my old one.

Again, though: If Obama were demanding that credit card information matched donor information, he couldn't draw in $150 million largely from fraudulent overseas donors.

Anyone see a pattern? Jennifer Brunner isn't bothered by "voters" with non-matchable information casting votes; Barack Obama doesn't take the most basic safeguard of ensuring that a donor's information matches the information on his credit card.

Try buying something anywhere with a credit card. You check to see if you can get away with entering false information about your name and address.

An automated check bounces all such attempts. Unless this safeguard has been specifically disabled.

And why would anyone do that?

I just can't think of a single reason.

Thanks to Mark.

More: John Galt joins a Who's Who of fictitious characters and dubious celebrities (such as "OJ Simpson") who've somehow managed to get past Obama's super-high-tech security measures.

Why, it's almost like breaking into the Black Vault in the CIA headquarters (as seen in Mission: Impossible)!

Ethan Hunt: [Ethan narrates someone getting into the vault] The only person allowed inside has to pass through a series of security checks. First is voiceprint identification... Then, he has to put in a 6 digit code.

That only gets him into the outer room. Next, he is positively identified by retinal scan.

Finally, the security measures are only deactivated after insertion of a double electronic keycard... which we won't have.

Once inside the vault, there are 3 security systems in operation whenever the technician is out of the room. First is sound sensitive; anything above a whisper will set it off. The second is temperature-sensitive. Even the body heat of an unauthorized person inside the vault can trigger the alarm if the temperature rises just a single degree. And that temperature is controlled by an air conditioning vent 30 feet above the vault floor. That vent is guarded by a laser net.

The third one is on the floor, and it's pressure sensitive. Just the slightest increase in weight will set it off. And any of these systems, if set off, will trigger an automatic lockdown. Now believe me when I tell you, gentlemen, that all 3 systems, are state of the art.

Luther Stickel: That sounds impossible.

Ethan Hunt: Alternately, we can just enter the name of a cartoon character, and we're in like Flynn.

Luther Stickel: Well let's do that one then.

Ethan Hunt: Which one? The one with the gymnastic glide into the room in my heat-dissipating jet black Intrusion Suit?

Luther Stickel: No, the second one. The cartoon character one.

Ethan Hunt: Dude, I look really good in that black suit.

Luther Stickel: Cartoon character.

Ethan Hunt: It's a John Paul Gualtier, man. I, like, never get to wear it.

Luther Stickel: Cartoon character.

Ethan Hunt: Sometimes I think you're just jealous. Green is not a good look on you, Luther.

Posted by: Ace at 04:06 PM | Comments (73)
Post contains 587 words, total size 4 kb.

Idiot.

Thanks to someone.

Posted by: Ace at 03:56 PM | Comments (29)
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.

We are Joe.

They're still beating on him. They just can't let this man upset the One™.

Fuck em. Obama opened his mouth, let him deal with it.

pic courtesy Iowahawk, a known rabble-rouser.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 03:38 PM | Comments (18)
Post contains 48 words, total size 1 kb.

Patterico is all over them because there is, of course, recorded evidence -- the long-ago posting of a blog entry by an Obama supporter who attended the political meet-and-greet. (That entry is now deleted, but it lives on in Google cache).

But what Patterico should be nailing them for is far more egregious.

It turns out the LAT is claiming the allegation is false -- utterly false -- because they're quibbling with the word "launched." Another witness, they say, says she remembers there being other coffees before this one, and therefore he didn't "launch" his campaign from Ayers' living room.

But note the LAT does not explain that narrow distinction when the label the story false. They claim it is false in both broad outline as well as in the particulars. They do not take the one sentence necessary to explain, properly, that while there is some dispute about whether this was the first coffee, there is no dispute the coffee actually happened, and indeed may have been the first as well.

Instead, they just echo Barack Obama's obnoxiously dishonest blanket denial -- concealing the fact that that denial is being made on extremely narrow grounds.

Apparently they can take the time to explain this very narrow disputation to Patterico in an email, but don't believe it should be shared with the general public.

Posted by: Ace at 03:35 PM | Comments (22)
Post contains 272 words, total size 2 kb.

Lots of different blogs are posting stories about the political left's newest attack on Sarah Palin, so I won't link any in particular. Suffice it to say that the gist of all the stories is that the left is outraged that Palin told a 3rd Grader that the role of the Vice President is to be "in charge of the senate".

Here's the CNN story that started the left's latest tantrum: "Palin takes heat for saying VP in charge of the Senate."

This manufactured outrage is just an extension of the "Palin doesn't know what a VP does" meme that started a few weeks ago when an old CNBC interview ran with a clip of the Governor demurring on her prospects of being selected as McCain's running mate because (paraphrasing) "someone would have to tell me what VP's do" (the context making it obvious to most fair observers that she was trying to joke about the VP's relative lack of portfolio vs. that of a Governor).

But Palin is actually right: The Constitution empowers the Vice President to Preside over the Senate. The majority party cannot prevent him/her from doing so.

And this matters. Why?

Because whoever sits in that chair has actual parliamentary power in a couple of areas.

For example, say you are watching C-Span and you hear two Senators shouting at the chair for the privilege of speaking, or to ask a procedural question. The only person who is recognized to legitimately take the floor, is, by Senate rules, the person who the Presiding Officer hears and acknowledges first.

If Palin were in that chair, she could make the call as to who is recognized to speak or to ask a parliamentary question. By using this ability, Palin could, in fact, structure the order of debate or to render a procedural inquiry moot.

In fact, procedurally the President of the Senate (or their designee) makes all the calls. The President of the Senate can be overturned by a vote of the Senate, but, absent that vote, the ruling of the Chair governs the action on the floor. It is not far fetched to say that on a controversial bill, a President of the Senate who wished to delay proceedings could in fact force repeated votes to overturn his or her rulings.

Let me share a real world example from my memory with you:

In 2000, when Bill Clinton was President, he appointed a really liberal judge named Richard Paez to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The vote was expected to be close (it ended up being 59-39) and Al Gore showed up to preside over the Senate.

Why? Because Al Gore was campaigning for President, and Paez was a vote in which Hispanic activist groups (La Raza in particular) had been particularly interested in happening. The GOP had bottled Paez' nomination up under Orrin Hatch's judiciary chairmanship for over 4 years due to Paez' record of activism. But with the Jeffords flip, the nomination received new life in the waning days of the Clinton term. I think, but am not certain, that Paez was particularly politically important because he was a "first": i.e. the "first Hispanic" to be appointed to the 9th Circuit.

So Gore shows up, But there was a hitch. Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions had discovered that Richard Paez just so happened to be the same judge who was presiding over some of the Gore-illegal campaign contributions cases in California. To many, including Sessions who made the case on the Senate floor, it appeared that Paez was being rewarded with a judicial nomination for his "good work" in protecting Gore. Paez only received his nomination to the 9th Circuit, after the Gore cases had been sent to him. (An interesting fact: Paez wasn't assigned the Gore cases randomly as is the custom; he was specifically tasked with them). It looked like a clear conflict of interest (would a judge interested in advancing his career undermine the man who had appointed him and the man who could, if he were elected, consider advancing him to the Supreme Court?).

Anyway, I can remember watching Sessions do a ballsy thing. With Gore sitting in the chair, Sessions pointed out that their was a Standing Rule of the Senate that prevented the Presiding officer from voting on any issue in which they have a personal or financial conflict of interest. Sessions essentially tried to disqualify Gore from presiding over the vote by arguing that Gore shouldn't be voting on promoting a Judge who was handling a criminal case implicating Gore.

Gore was forced to rule in favor of himself in order to resolve the dispute.

(See Update below for strike through explanation) more...

Posted by: Jack M. at 03:22 PM | Comments (38)
Post contains 1178 words, total size 7 kb.

You're right, I shouldn't link stuff like this.

Posted by: Ace at 02:18 PM | Comments (81)
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.

ACORN.

MSNBC has launched a news project with a variety of left-wing special interest groups to boost their Election Day coverage and help viewers experiencing problems at the polls.

One of the groups involved in MSNBC's "Election Protection" project is the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now. ACORN has been involved in rampant voter registration fraud across the nation this election cycle and is actively supporting Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama for president.

"Our partnership with Election Protection will play a major role in NBC News' 'Making Your Vote CountÂ’ coverage, said Phil Alongi, Executive Producer of NBC News' Election Coverage in an Oct. 22 press release. "Not only will we be able to direct voters who are experiencing problems with a hotline to call, we will also have our team of reporters and producers follow-up on the information Election Protection is gathering."

When asked for comment about ACORN's role in the project MSNBC spokesman Jeremy Gaines wrote Townhall in an email "this a question for them, not us."

Um... no, it's actually a question for you, cocksucker.

Check out this Batman's Rogues Gallery of Left Wing Groups:

The National Council of La Raza, U.S. Pirg, NAACP, the Human Rights Campaign, the National Gay and Lesbian Law Association, Sierra Club and the Service Employees International Union are among Election Protection's many partners.

Why not the Weathermen while you're at it?

Thanks to CInAZ.

Posted by: Ace at 01:59 PM | Comments (48)
Post contains 248 words, total size 2 kb.

For a while, I've been paying particular attention to the Gallup poll, as they got it almost nearly right in 2006.

But of course they've been wrong before -- and other people have been right before.

As many commenters have told me, TIPP got the 2004 election exactly right.

So though I've been ignoring them, I should note that they have The One only up by The Three Point Seven.

Posted by: Ace at 01:54 PM | Comments (36)
Post contains 84 words, total size 1 kb.