Update: Vid of Gary giving his deranged side of the story at Screw Loose Change.

Thanks to Slublog.

...

The assault is convenientlynot in this video. The Truthers filming this say the camera was broken at that point (and the evidence of what happened conveniently lost). They also claim the girl's father was a "provocateur" who attacked Gary the Truther Loser.

Not really gripping, but maybe worth watching if you're a fan of Olympic-class douchebaggery, as I am.
more...

Posted by: Ace at 12:09 PM | Comments (74)
Post contains 113 words, total size 1 kb.

Well! At least this is one scenario I don't have to worry about too much.

A woman is accused of chasing her boyfriend with a knife after thinking he was an actor in a pornographic movie they were watching together.

...

"She almost shanked me and everything. She put the (expletive) knife right under my throat," the victim told a 911 operator.

The victim, wearing only a pair of shorts took off down Five Points, begging the 911 dispatcher for help.

He said Moya had already stabbed him in the face and bitten him on his chest.

...

She was also charged with child abuse because deputies say she left her eight-month-old boy alone in the home while she chased her boyfriend down the road.

In fairness to the woman, those testicles were the spitting image. /fletch

She was also booked on two counts of aggravated eyebrow shaving with intent to pencil in.

Via Conservative Belle, with this story of a WWII vet who fought back against robbers.

Posted by: Ace at 11:39 AM | Comments (40)
Post contains 200 words, total size 1 kb.

BEEP. BEEP. BEEP. That's the sound of me getting more popcorn.

Yesterday (?) on Olby's show, he talked with Howard Fineman about the need for "threats of retribution" to get Clinton to drop out of the race. He sort of suggests that a superdelegate "takes her into a room, and only he comes out."

Now, some on the Left (Obama supporters) say he was just joking and that he didn't mean that someone should kill her. Others on the Left (Clinton supporters and feminists) are absolutely losing their shit:

What Keith Olbermann said yesterday is not symbolic. He flatly said a (male) Democratic super delegate should take Hillary Clinton into a room, and only the man should emerge.

Keith Olbermann is openly advocating the murder of Hillary Clinton.

[...]

I have myself read comments advocating rape and murder. I have read main posts saying she was inciting violent acts against her, or saying they could "understand" the position of those who wished violent harm to befall her, her husband and her daughter. The descriptions of what Obama should do to Hillary verge on the pornographic. Not a day goes by that some prominent voice on the left or in the MSM does not demand her submission, subordination and public humiliation.

And now a major MSM celebrity and talking head, not some anonymous commenter on some obscure blog, has openly and unapologetically advocated that Hillary Clinton be marched into a dark room and murdered.

I think it's pretty clear that Olby wasn't actually asking someone to murder her, but I'll happily watch while Democrats tear themselves apart arguing the question. In February, Clinton dramatically demanded an apology from an MSNBC reporter for saying that the campaign had "pimped out" Chelsea to shill for her mother. I wonder if Clinton will demand a similar apology from Olbermann.

The video is tucked below the fold. You decide.

UPDATED: That was fast. Drew just 'mailed to tell me that Olbermann has an answer:

Olbermann responds to TVNewser: "It is a metaphor. I apologize: the generic 'he' gender could imply something untoward. It should've been 'only the other comes out — from a political point of view.'"

I still don't get it. The murder or beat-down threat isn't any better if a woman is doing the murder, is it? Or do Leftists think that only a (male) superdelegate is a reasonable suspect for violence?

Because, clearly, if he'd said and "only she--the superdelegate--comes out" then we'd just have assumed that they had a happy little quilting bee and Clinton conceded because her running stitch just wasn't as fine.

The reason I ask is because Rachel Sklar at HuffPost used the same parenthetical reference to men when she was writing about this:

There really seems to be only one interpretation here, and the only point of debate is on whether it's okay or not. I'm going to cut that one short: It's not. To the fellow (male) journo I wrote to about this yesterday, who waved it off as just some colorful film-noir imagery, I say: can you IMAGINE if someone had said that about Obama?

Are we about to start listing our identity groups every time we're mentioned? Yes, I know that Democrats perceive the world by slotting individuals into well-defined identity categories, but this is a new step. This is Gabe (male) signing off... more...

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 10:39 AM | Comments (61)
Post contains 606 words, total size 4 kb.

Guy tries to pick up women. Reacts badly when the women mention their respective boyfriends.

Content Warning for language. The F-bomb. Interestingly, there are two words bleeped out, and yet the F-bomb is used with aplomb.

Have the British discovered curse words dirtier than "fuck"? Is there now a "Profanity Gap" we're losing? Can we use private innovation -- an XXX Prize, maybe -- to put American know-how into reclaiming the lead in the Obscenity Race? more...

Posted by: Ace at 10:33 AM | Comments (31)
Post contains 92 words, total size 1 kb.

That headline is actually taken from an old AndrewR. poem, channeling William Carlos Williams:

So much depends
on a red wheelbarrow
and two old dudes
blowing each other

Below is Wright whining to the solemn, concerned Billy Moyers that he was unfairly "taken out of context." Notice the tough, close questioning that follows. Or will follow, presumably. In like 2043.
more...

Posted by: Ace at 10:12 AM | Comments (42)
Post contains 351 words, total size 3 kb.

He seems to be doing more pleading than threatening. He doesn't seem like a guy holding a lot of high cards. He seems like the jerkoff chasing the gutshot draw who keeps whining that other bettors keep upping the ante.

The threat:

Muqtada al-Sadr is considering setting aside his political ambitions and restarting a full-scale fight against U.S.-led forces — a worrisome shift that may reflect Iranian influence on the young cleric and could open the way for a shadow state protected by his powerful Mahdi Army.

A possible breakaway path — described to The Associated Press by Shiite lawmakers and politicians — would represent the ultimate backlash to the Iraqi government's pressure on al-Sadr to renounce and disband his Shiite militia.

By snubbing the give-and-take of politics, al-Sadr would have a freer hand to carve out a kind of parallel state with its own militia and social services along the lines of Hezbollah in Lebanon, a Shiite group founded with Iran's help in the 1980s.

It also would carry potentially disastrous security implications as the Pentagon trims its troops strength and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki finally shows progress on national reconciliation.

The pleading:

Less than one week after threatening to conduct an uprising against the Iraqi government and US forces, Muqtada al Sadr, the leader of the Mahdi Army, has called for his fighters to maintain the self-imposed cease-fire. The US and Iraqi military continue to strike at Sadr’s Mahdi Army in Baghdad. Ten “criminals” were killed in strikes in Sadr City, making 82 Mahdi fighters killed in the six days since Sadr threatened renewed violence.

In a statement read during the Friday prayers at the Al Hikma mosque in Sadr City, Sadr called for his militia to halt the fighting. “You have been patiently committed to the freeze decision and magnificently obeyed your leader,” Sadr statement read, according to Voices of Iraq. “I hope you retain your patience and faith.”

Sadr also said he did not threaten the Iraqi government with “open war” last weekend, but was directing his threat against Coalition forces. “The open war we threaten is meant against the occupiers,” Sadr said. “There is no war between us and our Iraqi brothers regardless of their sect or ethnicity.”

After that he made another threat.

Meanwhile the IA and US forces are ignoring his threats and bluster and pulping his criminal lunatic army.

Correction: someone points out that today's statement doesn't contradict yesterday's as I imagined it did. I've changed the headline to avoid that error.

Posted by: Ace at 09:08 AM | Comments (43)
Post contains 456 words, total size 3 kb.

Unwarranted inferences.

More Unhelpful Negativity: Great piece on Obama's many distractions.

Key bit: As mentioned yesterday on Hot Air, the spin from Obama's own website proclaims, in all-caps and bold, just as printed below:

"Respectable fixtures of the mainstream." Check the video at the end of the post to see Dohrn calling for an "overthrow" of the US government -- in 2007.

This is what Barack Obama considers "mainstream." Ayers, Dohrn, Wright -- all "mainstream" figures.

Update: Re: the terrorist fundraiser's page on Obama's site -- they've now also pulled the page completely.

And yet the screenshots live on.

Heh: Slublog suggests a more honest banner for Obama's site:
more...

Posted by: Ace at 07:30 AM | Comments (25)
Post contains 150 words, total size 1 kb.

I'm guessing these were just warning shots that did their job.

Update [Gabe]: The ship was a contracted cargo vessel called Westward Venture. It had a security team on board which fired on the fast boats when they closed to 100 yards and wouldn't respond to flares or whistles.

This happened in the Strait of Hormuz, the same bottleneck that saw a similar confrontation in January (Coblogger Purple Avenger wrote about it). In that case, the Iranian fast boats played chicken with bona fide U.S. Navy warships. The Iranian Foreign Ministry later played down the incident, calling it "something normal taking place every now and then."

There was conjecture at the time that elements of Iran's Revolutionary Guard were attempting to increase tensions ahead of President Bush's visit to the region. I suppose something similar could be going on now, as Iran tries to save face following its recent losses in Iraq.

Also, let's not forget that the last time this happened, the absolute loons on the left said "what's the big deal, it's just a speedboat." As if a little boat is simply harmless.

Posted by: Ace at 07:27 AM | Comments (33)
Post contains 213 words, total size 1 kb.

Some are writing to note that the WaPo article on Walls now does note his political affiliation, and fairly prominently.

But it didn't yesterday when I posted it. I didn't see his party affiliation mentioned (and certainly not so prominently and so early in the article) so I asked my original tipster, Hoke Malokey, to confirm if in his memory the article avoided mentioning Walls' Democratic affiliation. "ABSOLUTELY!!!" he just wrote back.

Further, his original tip included most of the article in the email itself. Here's is that quote:

The mayor of District Heights was arrested early this morning in Washington after allegedly propositioning an undercover officer posing as a male prostitute, police and sources said.

James L. Walls Jr., 30, was arrested at 12:30 a.m. at Sixth and F streets NW and charged with solicitation for lewd and immoral purposes, according to police.

Walls is an ordained Baptist minister, according to the District Heights Web site. He is the former assistant pastor of Greater Light Missionary Baptist Church and is the associate pastor of Forestville New Redeemer Baptist Church.

Walls was elected mayor in May 2006, the youngest person to ever serve as the city's mayor, according to the site. His term runs until 2010.

He is a graduate of Bowie State University and works for the Town of Fairmount Heights as the town administrator, according to the District Heights Web site.

As you can see, no mention of his party affiliation. That has now been added to the article.

So: I'm right, the article did not mention his affiliation, but does now, and I guess the Washington Post should be congratulated for doing its job.

Posted by: Ace at 07:04 AM | Comments (15)
Post contains 291 words, total size 2 kb.

On Ayers:

Again focuses on comparison of Ayers to Tom Coburn, asks for apology. Also however says we should be talking about this "unrepentant terrorist" and it's proper to raise it in the media.

On the NC Wright ad:

"It's not the campaign we want to wage." "Inferences made" are "unnecessary" and "unwarranted" but allows that Wright is a legitimate issue. Does not explain which "inferences" he specifically objects to.

On Basra:

'We're pleasantly surprised" by Maliki's actions. "Generally pleased" at how the Iraqi Army fared.

Follow-up to NC Wright ad:

Asked if his position is that the Wright issue is legitimate, but he doesn't want to see ads on it, he's vague once again: He says some people find it "offensive" and that he wants to run a "positive campaign."

more...

Posted by: Ace at 06:18 AM | Comments (74)
Post contains 735 words, total size 5 kb.