...with no independent confirmation, incidentally. How could they "confirm" the NYT's "story"? The NYT, having no actual evidence or even quotes stating there was an affair, instead was forced to "write around" the big hole in their "scoop," and instead insinuate there might have been an affair without putting itself in libel jeopardy by actually stating that.

The National Enquirer, on the other hand, had their story locked down enough to, you now, actually be able to report on the story they were reporting on.

The media is offering the excuse to us repeatedly that they simply don't like these sort of sex-scandal stories. It's not liberal bias, they claim, but a bias against this story in general, this sort of seedy invasion-of-privacy keehole-peeping sexpose.

But that's simply not true. They love sex scandal stories. So long as they star they proper villains.

ABC, CBS, and NBC all waited for weeks to touch the emerging story of the adultery of John Edwards as the National Enquirer nailed down the story. None even breathed the name of Edwards until he decided to confess. But when the New York Times used far weaker editorial standards than the Enquirer, reporting on February 21 that there might be adultery between John McCain and lobbyist Vicki Iseman, citing hearsay from unnamed former McCain aides who were "convinced the relationship had become romantic," all three networks leaped on the story.

McCain's outraged denials didn't stop the story from erupting on TV the very morning it hit the Times. CBS Early Show host Harry Smith touted "This bombshell report that Republican front-runner John McCain may have had a romantic relationship with a lobbyist who was a visitor to his office and traveled with him on a client's corporate jet." ABC's George Stephanopoulos said it could be deadly. On a scale of one to ten, with ten being fatal, he warned it was a "six or a seven...a damaging story, there's no doubt about that." NBC's Tim Russert said the story would "play out today in a very big way."

Is the National Enquirer a grubby, ethics-free outfit whose stories can only be touched with "tongs," as a NYT editor said?

Really? Let us recall how the Mark Foley page-pickup sex story got pushed into the media: From a blog by an anonymous writer who was furthermore connected with a Democratic/partisan organization.

Now, in that case, all the news organizations began investigating the charges shortly after they got widespread publicity on the internet (pushed by leftwing blogs, of course, but rightwing blogs reported the claims as well).

They did not simply report what Stop Sexual Predators was claiming, of course. But they sure did work diligently to confirm and nail down the story, so that a few weeks after this anonymous blogger made his entirely unsupported charges, every news organization was able to confirm the report and run with it. And run with it. And run with it. And run with it.

And run with it all the way from August '06 through the November '06 elections.

Now, can the MSM explain to me why they believe a fucking anonymous blogger who had no track record nor web presence except to air his allegations is seen as a credible source whose charges merit a substantial commitment of resources, but well-sourced reports by the "trashy tabloid" National Enquirer, with a solid track record of bona-fide scoops, weren't worth more than a few perfunctory phone calls?

One big question that the MSM needs to answer: What precisely did the Edwards campaign tell you when you made your one or two "investigative" phone calls or emails?

I ask because David Shuster insists the Edwards people were able to convince him to not only not run the Hunter story, but to not even bother investigating it further.

So what did Edwards, or his people, tell these cynical, truth-hunting MSM types that so swayed them the story was so obviously a bust it wasn't worth pursuing at all?

Let me guess:

Rielle Hunter is a "fantasist" who "imagined" an affair with John Edwards. She's crazy. She's like... a stalker or something, obsessed w ith Edwards, and angry that she was fired by the campaign. All of the Enquirer's claims come from her friends, who only know what Rielle Hunter is telling them, but she's a very troubled young (ish) woman with very serious psychosexual issues whose lunatic delusions of a love affair she dreamed of but never actually had cause her to say these ridiculous things.

I am not being snarky. What else could Edwards and his camp have possibly said, given the fact that Rielle Hunter's friends were alleging the affair?

Did none of these very smart, very professional journalists noticed that this basic "nuts and sluts" defense was more or less the exact claim offered by Bill Clinton?

Is the MSM telling us that when someone offers this sort of rehashed nonsense, they collectively deem it credible and authoritative?

Posted by: Ace at 01:14 PM | Comments (12)
Post contains 852 words, total size 5 kb.

I'm hesitant to post this, because while the American Thinker is unable to find any such Obama quotes, I would imagine Obama wouldn't invent such a fable out of whole cloth.

Sometime, somewhere, he probably did mention Georgia in a laundry-list of potential hot-spots.

Still, it's incumbent upon him to provide the evidence for this, rather than asking the rest of us to take his assertion of after-the-fact prophecy on faith.

Thanks to Andy.

My Hesitancy Was Well-Founded: Obama has a briefing-book position on Georgia, cobbled together by his foreign policy advisers, on his website.

Not really a prophecy, though. Just saying what any of his advisers familiar with that area would tell him.

Thanks to ether.

Posted by: Ace at 12:46 PM | Comments (43)
Post contains 143 words, total size 1 kb.

Hmmm... It's an obligatory link, but I gotta tell ya, I'm unimpressed.

This one is okay...

She had the kind of body that made a man want to have sex with her.

But this is an old, old well-used joke structure, the set-up for a similie or metaphor that never actually comes, instead just going completely literal. I've been doing this joke since seventh grade; after exhausting six thousand variations of the "Your momma's a whore because..." joke, I started using the "Your momma's a whore because men pay her for sexual favors."

Can you tell I'm jealous? I really wanted one for my Moqtada al-Sadr Action Thriller series.

Thanks to MattM.

Posted by: Ace at 11:36 AM | Comments (43)
Post contains 120 words, total size 1 kb.

I'm pretty sure I've seen this movie. I think it was called Sorority Whore Science Fair.

No wait-- it was Sorority Whore Science Fair II -- Redox.

A University of Iowa professor accused of fondling female students in exchange for giving them "A's" in his class had been put on paid administrative leave.

Arthur Miller, a political science professor, was charged with four counts of bribery after he allegedly asked female students to let him fondle them in return for better grades.

University spokesman Steve Parrott said the university is conducting its own investigation, separate from the criminal case. Meanwhile, Miller is on paid leave and has been barred from having any contact with students until the criminal case is resolved, Parrott said.

Miller was arrested on Friday and released from jail on Saturday.

Police said he allegedly asked to touch the breasts of four female students between May 8 and 13. In return, he would give the students "A's" in his class.

Miller's wife, Natasha Ivanova, said she doesn't believe the allegations.

"The whole situation is very sad for us," Ivanova said. "I believe these accusations are false. We, as a family, are looking forward to the day all of these charges are dropped and his name is cleared."

Professor Miller says he will not spend his suspension idly. He plans to conduct a large-scale political survey, a project funded with a $150,000 grant given to him by his good friend Fred Baron. "I just feel it is my duty to support this family, and to advance the cause of political science research generally," Mr. Baron told a reporter, as he stuffed thirty-five hundred dollars into the reporter's chest pocket. "That's for your daughter Amelia's orthodontics," Mr. Baron quipped. "And also, she'd like a pony."

That last paragraph cannot be confirmed at this time.

Posted by: Ace at 11:15 AM | Comments (50)
Post contains 327 words, total size 2 kb.

Playing into age-old stereotypes that blacks are violent and are well-endowed with midichlorians. (When Princess Amadala got a look at Mace Windu's midichlorian count, she exclaimed "It's twue! It's twue!")

All I know is: Whoever wins this duel, I lose -- either way my sister is going to get porked by a black guy with a hot pulsing love-saber.

Via The Anchoress, whose "Online Retreat" today looks at lightning and "orgone energy" (life-spirit, elan vitae, what have you).

Posted by: Ace at 10:19 AM | Comments (42)
Post contains 86 words, total size 1 kb.

Can't say the NYT isn't "making things right" here. They've finally confessed to screwing up a 48 year old theater review -- WOW, and are backing off on 12 years of numerous misrepresentations of what McCain flew in Vietnam ("fighter" vs ground attack aircraft).

...A listing of credits on April 28, 1960, with a theater review of 'West Side Story' on its return to the Winter Garden theater, misstated the surname of the actor who played Action. He is George Liker, not Johnson...

...described his role as a Navy pilot in Vietnam incorrectly. He flew bombing missions as an attack aircraft pilot, but he was not a “fighter pilot.”...

Now if they could just get that sequoia tree trunk out of their eye rather than focusing on millimeter length splinters...

Posted by: Purple Avenger at 10:17 AM | Comments (11)
Post contains 141 words, total size 1 kb.

It's sort of funny to read liberals all swearing to a man that liberal bias had nothing to do with this. They're willing to admit all sorts of journalistic sins, except, of course, the one of which they're most guilty.

But the real headline is Kurtz' convenient misremembering of the Lewinsky affair. Kaus quoting and commenting--

[KURTZ:] I don't think the party favoritism charge holds up. Yes, the media went hard after two Republican senators, Larry Craig (who pleaded guilty in that bathroom incident) and David Vitter (who admitted calling an escort service). But they also pounced on New York's Democratic then-governor, Eliot Spitzer (whose taste in prostitutes was revealed by the New York Times), and, famously, Bill Clinton (whose Monica Lewinsky mess was disclosed by The Post and hotly pursued by Newsweek). [E.A.]

[KAUS:] And here I'd thought Michael Isikoff's original Lewinsky story was withheld by Newsweek--making it an odd data point for someone arguing that the mainstream media "pounced" on a Democrat. ... The Lewinsky scandal took off only after Matt Drudge reported that Isikoff's story wasn't being published.

It's sort of shocking that Kurtz could either forget or deliberately misrepresent the history of that reportage -- the Drudge Report's most famous IMPACTING HARD on the spiked-by-the-MSM Isikoff story launched the web as a news channel, for God's sakes.

If Ann Coulter (I presume) hadn't leaked that to Drudge, would the MSM ever have reported it? Almost certainly... when Ken Starr publicly announced his investigation, or released his report. Kurtz insistence that the media "pounced" on the Clinton story isn't merely utterly wrong -- the true account of the Clinton situation actually tends to prove the media is protective of its precious Democratic politicians.

Kurtz' "evidence" in fact proves the MSM will not report on Democratic sexual scandals... until they're left with no other choice whatsoever.

Posted by: Ace at 09:59 AM | Comments (17)
Post contains 336 words, total size 2 kb.

So Ace won't be around this weekend, and he doesn't know when he'll be able to reschedule (though it shouldn't be TOO long).

Not sure how many of you folks are still interested in having a NYC event this weekend. Post yer thoughts here.

Posted by: Open Blog at 09:47 AM | Comments (18)
Post contains 50 words, total size 1 kb.

Jake Tapper, obviously a man of the left but also usually level-headed, can't resist the Nutroots'/Obama camp's endless racial insinuations, and wants you to count how many young white women are in John McCain's latest ad.

For God's sake. Is he really postulating that their are voters worrying that Barack Obama is going to swoop in and start fucking their wives and daughters?

And if John McCain featured black supporters, wouldn't the complaint be that John McCain was trying to "blacken up" Obama?

Is there anything Obama's opponents can do without being branded racists? Or to prove we're not racist must we give up opposing him altogether?

The latter has been a stealth insinuation from the left and Obama throughout the campaign.

Perhaps Jake Tapper ought to start counting all the white women featured on Barack Obama's official website. If displaying Barack Obama within three yards of our precious white women is so dangerously suggestive in its racial messaging, why does The Chosen One apparently not fear such messages at all? Is there something about the Lamb of Chicago that allows him to selectively toggle off these dangerous stealth messages about miscegenation when he posts a photo himself?

If there is, can he tell John McCain and the rest of us what this magic incantation is, so we can toggle off the racism and stop being pestered with this subretarded complaint?

Obama poses with Caylee Anthony
just before he schtupped her mom
and the child "went missing."

Obama gets ready to
lay the pipe to your grandma.
Dude -- he's totally going to fuck
your grandma!!!
PS: Note the black hose prominently
displayed in the upper left foreground.
Can he make it more obvious?!

Even some white men find themselves growing "curious"
when exposed to Obama's savage sexuality. Not just
miscegenation, man -- homosexual Gallic miscegenation!
That's like the worst miscegenation there is.

Those would be the supposed "stealth messages" if McCain used the same photos, right?

Meanwhile, noted professor of semiotics Keith Olbermann claims the right has denigrated Obama's race by noting that he seems to have a problem with "short-term memory." Because, like, that's a big stereotype about blacks. They lack short-term memories. He goes on to say that when Hannity and Limbaugh says that no one on the right impugned Obama's race, they just mean "no one called him the N word -- yet."

Via Hot Air.

Posted by: Ace at 08:54 AM | Comments (64)
Post contains 415 words, total size 4 kb.

Virgina Governor Tim Kaine, my candidate in the Obama Veepstakes Pool, says it was Obama's intervention that lead to a cease fire between Russia and Georgia.

It was a bad crisis for the world. It required tough words but also a smart approach to call on the international community to step in. And IÂ’m very, very happy that the SenatorÂ’s request for a ceasefire has been complied with by President Medvedev.

This will of course come as news to French President Nicholas Sarkozy who actually flew to Moscow to talk to the Russians.

President Sarkozy won the Kremlin's agreement today on the conditions for a cessation of hostilities in Georgia that would see both sides return to their initial positions before fighting erupted last week.

A six-point plan endorsed by President Medvedev during a visit by the French leader to Moscow calls on both Russia and Georgia to end all hostilities and allow free access for humanitarian assistance.

Based on the principle of respect for Georgian sovereignty, it nevertheless promised a fuller discussion on the future status of GeorgiaÂ’s two breakaway provinces, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, which both want to become part of Russia.

..."We are not at peace yet but we are at a temporary cessation of hostilities which is certainly significant," Mr Sarkozy, whose country holds the rotating presidency of the European Council of ministers, told a press conference at the Kremlin.

But he added: "There is still a lot of work to do. The night is young."

It's too soon to tell if the ceasefire will hold or even fully take effect but I think we can all agree that the notion that Obama is responsible for any of this is, what's the approved AoS term? Ah yes, batshit crazy.

On second thought, we do know that He works in mysterious ways so perhaps Sarkozy is just His tool in this case.

Either way, if part of Obama's VP selection criteria includes a check box for willingness to beclown oneself in praise of The One, I'm really liking my chances in the pool.

More [Gabe]:For the Russians, the orders are to return to pre-conflict positions. That means "peacekeepers" will remain in South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

A lengthy AP report recaps the latest activity. A taste:

In Tskhinvali, South Ossetia's provincial capital, the body of a Georgian soldier lay in the street along with debris. A poster hanging nearby showed Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and the slogan "Say yes to peace and stability" as South Ossetian separatist fighters launched rockets at a Georgian plane soaring overhead. Broken glass and other debris littered the ground. [...]

The situation in Tskhinvali, the capital of South Ossetia, remained tense as sporadic fighting and artillery duels continued, but the city was in the control of Russian army and South Ossetian forces.

In villages around Tskhinvali once populated by ethnic Georgians, South Ossetian fighters reportedly were setting fire to Georgian houses and searching for hidden Georgian fighters.

An AP photographer in the village of Ruisi near South Ossetia saw fresh damage from a Russian air raid that locals said came just 30 minutes before Medvedev's televised statement.

We don't know yet how many are dead. Both sides are making claims, but there are few independent observers in the areas where the worst fighting occurred. One noteworthy event reported by a Russian news agency and repeated by the UK's Daily mail is that Georgian troops torched a church in which South Ossetians had taken shelter. Gateway Pundit is skeptical. An atrocity like that needs to be investigated.

Posted by: DrewM at 08:15 AM | Comments (48)
Post contains 609 words, total size 4 kb.