Believe it or not, Rotten Tomatoes says it's the best-reviewed movie of any genre of the year, and may be the best-reviewed superhero movie ever.

This snuck up on me. After anticipating its release, I didn't realize it had been released until I saw someone's and liberrocky's reviews. Should have gone out yesterday when the blog was down to catch it.

Sit Through the Credits! So Gabriel just told me. I've seen other references.

Not sure what could be so awesome there. Iron Man's rogue's gallery is shit; the only nemesis I can think of is Mandarin, a stupid magician, and maybe War Machine when it goes bad. But War Machine is basically in this movie as "Iron Monger."

So what could it be? I don't want to spoil it but I have an idea.

White-fonted; scroll over to see a spoiler as to my guess.

Marvel now has a production company involved in turning these pictures out. They did Hulk 2, as well. Marvel likes cross-overs. Etc.

Posted by: Ace at 10:26 AM | Comments (47)
Post contains 176 words, total size 1 kb.

24% say it's "very likely," but those are Republicans like me so who cares, he can't win us anyhow.

But 56% agree it's either very likely or somewhat likely. That's a problem.

Via Hot Air's headlines.

Hot Air highlights the finding that 58% believe Obama denounced Wright out of political expediency only, while 42% report themselves to be diagnosably retarded and big fans of wearing misneakers and colorful t-shirts with funny pictures on them. And also, they self-report having committed "several strangulation killings" where the motive was Skittles.

More Rasmussen: McCain opens lead on Obama, 48%-42%.

Posted by: Ace at 10:08 AM | Comments (14)
Post contains 134 words, total size 1 kb.

Yup. That's how it looks.

The Conservatives won London.

How much of a fucking asshole do you have to be to deliver Londonistan to the fucking Tories?

Posted by: Ace at 09:59 AM | Comments (30)
Post contains 51 words, total size 1 kb.

P U N K ' D ! ! !

BULLSHIT: Loren Heal nails it. The subtitle misleads you into thinking you're hearing something you're not.

You're not. Loren provides the best explanation:

Hoax. #10 has it right. The original video shows Kantor saying "Those people are shitti-" [realizes he's on camera] " Excuse me." To Stephie: "How would you like to be the White House right now?"

Nothing to see here, move along. There is no way, after realizing he's on camera, that a pro like Kantor goes straight into a Sheets Byrd quotation.

Alas: She's right. Listen to it again, not listening for WWN, but "how would you like to be in the White House now?" That's what he's saying (thereabouts; he says something in the end I can't make out, but that's the thrust.) Once you're not conditioned to hear "WWN" but something else, you hear the something else.

And that something else makes a lot more sense in context. They're winning in Indiana. This would not be the time to call them "shit" or "White Niggers." At this moment, Kantor loves Indianans, no matter what he might have felt about them previously.

Kantor's spin that he was talking about pollsters just seems to be an innocent mistake. He's not talking about pollsters, I'm pretty sure. He's talking about the Bush White House, "shit[ting]" over the numbers.

Either way, he's absolved.

Context is important here. Indianans are either giving the state to Clinton or at least making it a near tie. Kantor has no reason whatsoever to denigrate them. Even if he really does think of them as "worthless white niggers," his attitude here would be "God, I love those worthless white niggers! They chose wisely! Their retard hillbilly brains figured it out!"

He would not be darkly sniping at people giving his candidate a key state. A Republican state, mind you. A dagger-in-the-heart state for George Bush.

Thanks, guys. Your bullshit detectors went off way before mine. Nicely done.

Apologies to Mickey Kantor and the makers of The War Room. I got suckered in by an "Internet Detective" and of course Kos and the Huffington Post.

When will I learn? Never trust content Kos or the Huffington Post.

Next Question: I assume that someone with no real connection to the Obama campaign did this video. Just another goofball Messiahniac with an Internet Detective license.

But did any Obama operatives push it to Kos and the HuffPo?

How I Punked Myself: I was actually on the original clip -- clip 9 -- and even was watching the scene in question. They seemed to be dressed the right way.

But I clicked off it, to an earlier clip. Because I realized Clip 9 was about the general election, and the Clinton campaign was winning big. I realized Kantor would not be sniping at Indianans on this huge day of victory, so I began clicking on Clips 6 and 7. Because I knew that if he said such a thing, he would say it on a dark day, a day when the polls showed him winning, and not on his day of triumph.

So, stupidly assuming there must be some there there, I clicked away from the actual scene just seconds before Kantor entered to look for earlier segments during darker periods. Because I wanted to confirm it, not disprove it.

Unconsciously, of course. Had I thought Kantor was about to enter the room in Clip 9 I would have stayed with it. But I figured it was likely real, but he'd only say something like that in an earlier clip, and so stopped watching.

I punked myself. I knew he wouldn't say that on Victory Day, and even though the Victory Day clip looked an awful lot like the supposed "WWN" clip, my brain said "Oh this can't be it" and moved on.

I don't suppose this stunt will be tried again, now that it's been so prominently exposed as fraudulent. But it is interesting that a whole new tactic in maliciously false internet electioneering has been discovered. Find some mumbled whisper, put up a subtitle claiming the candidate (or an advisor) is saying all sorts of awful things, sit back and watch the hits come in and your opponent sink in the polls (assuming people buy it, which they won't, not again).

I'm embarrassed at how easily I was duped. And the MSM, I admit, did not touch this story. They were more cautious.

What makes me feel all the more pathetic is that I've seen this technique used in a different context a dozen times before:

Duh. What a moron am I. If this asshole had claimed Kantor had said "Mustard my hole" and "may he poop on my knee?" I guess I would have believed it too.

Even more furious exposes of the perversely sexual Bollywood film industry at Snapped Shot.

The MSM Did Touch It: Ah, well. I knew they had to be stupider than me.

A commenter notes ABCNews had linked the story, and now they have stealth-deleted the link.

Hey, at least I'm admitting I was a fucking dupe. Can't ABCNews admit they erred?

Only bloggers make careless mistakes in rushing to link a hot, hype-y story? No. Only bloggers admit they make careless mistakes in rushing to link a hot, hype-y story.

(And only bloggers on the right, by and large. The left is still claiming the TANG documents are legit and that "something happened" in the Duke Lax Not-a-Rape case, for the love of God.) more...

Posted by: Ace at 07:31 AM | Comments (137)
Post contains 1441 words, total size 10 kb.

Not that there's anything wrong with that:

The first winner of the Mr Gay UK contest has been charged with murdering a man amid fears he planned to eat the corpse.

Anthony Morley, 35, was held after Damian Oldfield's body was found at a house in Harehills, Leeds, with a chunk cut out of the right leg.

Police are said to have found human flesh diced as though "for cooking".

Officers are now having to consider the possibility that the killer had "eaten some of the flesh."

They were alerted after a man, covered in blood and wearing a white nightgown and slippers, went into a nearby kebab shop.

The saddest part of this, of course, is the besmirching of the title of Mr. Gay UK.

Posted by: Ace at 06:55 AM | Comments (69)
Post contains 140 words, total size 1 kb.

You can almost feel the physical pain of the reporter as she tries to write this story in a way that doesnÂ’t violate the Worst Economy Meta-Narrative (All Praise The Meta-Narrative).

Employers cut far fewer jobs in April than in recent months and the unemployment rate dropped to 5 percent, a better-than-expected showing that nonetheless reveals strains in the nation's labor market.

For the fourth month in a row, the economy lost jobs, the Labor Department reported Friday. But in April the losses totaled 20,000, an improvement from the 81,000 reductions in payrolls logged in March. Job losses for both February and March turned out to be a bit deeper than previously reported.

The latest snapshot of the nationwide employment conditions — while clearly still weak — was better than many economists were anticipating. They were bracing for job cuts of 75,000 and for the unemployment rate to climb to 5.2 percent.

The unemployment rate, derived from a different statistical survey than the payroll figures, fell to 5 percent from 5.1 percent in March. That survey showed more people finding employment than those who didn't.

Businesses are handing out pink slips as they cope with an economy that is teetering on the edge of a recession, or possibly in one already. A severe housing slump, harder-to-get credit and financial turmoil have forced people and businesses to be more cautious in their spending. And that has hurt the economy.

Yes, we are possibly in a recession if we are all allowed to make up our own definition of what that means. Right now the favored formulation seems to be, weak growth+Republican administration+need to elect Democrats=RECESSION.

I love how now we are told that the unemployment rate isnÂ’t really the story. Funny but that never seemed to be the case before. Yet now when it shows a sliver of hope it must be ignored or disparaged.

Later in the article she manages a ‘keep hope alive’ moment when she says economists still think (fingers crossed!) that the unemployment rate will hit 6% later this year.

Nobody is saying the economy is roaring along but itÂ’s certainly nothing like what the Democrats and media (pardon the repetition) would like, nay need, us to believe.

BTW-The Dow closed over 13,000 yesterday and is up 75 at this moment...no Cowbell but still good news.

Posted by: DrewM at 06:42 AM | Comments (30)
Post contains 405 words, total size 3 kb.

You can call this “road rage”, or “elder abuse”, but I prefer to call it an out of control, deranged bitch, who was never taught to respect her elders:

Jessica Vasquez (pictured), 19, was taken into custody after she assaulted Evelyn Page, 81, who she thought was driving slowly in the 6200 block of South Meridian Street, on IndianapolisÂ’ south side, according to Indianapolis Metro police.Police said Vasquez sped around Page and then slammed on her brakes, forcing the elderly woman to stop.

Then, according to police, Vasquez jumped out of her car, opened the driver’s-side door of Page’s car and began beating her.Police said the victim tried to get away, but that Vasquez pulled her out of the car and continued beating her, forcing her to fall into two lanes of traffic.Page’s face was bloodied and her leg was broken in 14 places, 6News’ Jack Rinehart reported. She will also have to undergo knee replacement.”This is a crime that is outrageous, something that we don’t normally see,” said IMPD Detective Wendall Daniel. “We don’t normally see a female, 19 years old, beating an 81-year-old woman.”

HereÂ’s the local News Clip:

Cross-posted at Nice Deb (with mugshot).

Hat tip: Crime Scene KC

UPDATE:

An eye-witness describes the attack, here.

It sounds like the incident happened too quickly for passerbys to prevent it. But they still reacted quickly, and were able to help get Vasquez apprehended.

Also there's a discrepancy concerning the victim's injuries between the linked news articles, and the news video. The articles say the leg was broken in 14 places, the news anchor in the video says it was broken in three places. The latter sounds more plausible to me, but I don't know.

Posted by: Open Blog at 10:15 PM | Comments (108)
Post contains 306 words, total size 3 kb.

Following up on eddiebear's post (lot of good comments over there, too), I have to agree that more concern is warranted. And I know Ace disagrees with me about this, but propping up Clinton is a bad idea. Sure, we want the Democratic contest to continue, especially when it looked like she was in danger of dropping out. But she's looking a lot stronger now.

We've got to keep our eyes on the ball. She's the stronger of the two in the general. McCain will wipe the floor with Obama. Typically Democrats do not win without Pennsylvania. Guess who absolutely bombs in Pennsylvania? Democrats always make a fight of Ohio and Florida. Guess who got whooped in Ohio and Florida? And why? Because a large segment of Democratic blue-collar voters cannot bring themselves to vote for Obama.

Quinnipiac has a new poll that confirms this: McCain does better against Obama in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania than against Clinton. These are crucial states if we want to get to the magic number. Look:

Florida: Clinton tops McCain 49 - 41 percent; McCain gets 44 percent to Obama's 43 percent;
Ohio: Clinton beats McCain 48 - 38 percent; McCain gets 43 percent to Obama's 42 percent;
Pennsylvania: Clinton tops McCain 51 - 37 percent; Obama leads McCain 47 - 38 percent.

Now, lets not get too bent out of shape about the exact numbers. That's all subject to change in the general. The important point is that Clinton does better than Obama in these three key states, due largely to Obama's inability to connect with working-class white voters. That weakness is not going to magically go away, especially with Rev. Wright and Bittergate hanging around his neck.

It's time to stop playing around with this and conjecturing about a hypothetical Democratic crackup that may not even happen. People have started to believe their own propaganda. But the numbers don't back it up. At least as far as last month goes, 28% of Clinton supporters say they'd jump to McCain if Obama was the nominee, compared to only 19% if the situation were reversed. Now I know that's subject to change, and we all expect Obama supporters to riot on the floor of the convention if their guy loses. But what if they don't? Why would we take a risk on something like this?

If we can count to 270, the Democratic superdelegates can too. Pick your states. Why are we thinking about giving up Pennsylvania? What about Wisconsin and New Mexico? Them too? If she wins, we'll have have to fight Clinton for Ohio...in a year when the economy is going to be foremost on the minds of voters. That just doesn't make any sense.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 09:17 PM | Comments (73)
Post contains 473 words, total size 3 kb.

I must confess, I was always a bit amazed at the Obama "steamroller". Despite few, if any, legislative achievements of note, he rode the wave of unyielding media support, activist enthusiasm, and internet backing into what appeared, after the Potomac Primaries, a coronation and victory lap to the Democrat Nomination in Denver, as well as a November victory that would have made the 1964 Election look like a nailbiter.

Well, it appears as though much of the Obama hype is falling on a rough patch. Rev. Wright, Michelle's goofy comments, "bitter" and "clinging" remarks, more Rev. Wright, a disastrous debate performance, and Operation Chaos, to name a few events, have taken their toll. So much so, his Realclearpolitics.com lead is all but gone.

I know that Obama still has the delegate lead, still leads in North Carolina (albeit barely), and has a good shot in Indiana (though Hillary! will probably carry that state), and more superdelegates are leaning his way now. I know the media will continue to prop him up as much as they can, since they have invested so much so far in acting as an in-kind contribution to his candidacy. And I also concede that Barry will still have maniacal support from his true believers in the General Election.

So, I ask: Has Obama tanked? Is this merely a blip on his way to a January Coronation? And is this a good thing, given that McCain or The Canklesaurus would be President if not him?

Posted by: Open Blog at 07:28 PM | Comments (60)
Post contains 266 words, total size 2 kb.

Oh for the love of everything unholy.

McCain doesn't answer; I'm guessing the answer is yes.

And. So. What. Not a terrific moment, but sometimes shit happens.

Ridiculous.

Thanks to Saul Goode.

Posted by: Ace at 05:56 PM | Comments (93)
Post contains 62 words, total size 1 kb.