The thread that was supposed to be about McCain's and Palin's appearance got derailed, by myself, when I interjected an unrelated question about why Barack Obama's grades and transcripts haven't been released.

Based on the comments in that thread, it seems I'm wrong. Way wrong.

However, I kind of want to get rid of that diversion in that thread and let it stand with the original post.

So I'm moving the evidence of my pwnag3 here. Not to hide it -- it's still here -- just to let that post talk about what it should be talking about, rather than how stupid I am.

Below the fold, all the material from that post, including my final acceptance of my almost-certain pwning. more...

Posted by: Ace at 01:19 PM | Comments (46)
Post contains 992 words, total size 6 kb.

I wonder, though, if they have any power to decide if the song can be used, or if the Wilson sisters control all those rights.

If the writers are cool with it, at the very least someone could cover the song and use that at rallies. I think. Assuming they haven't sold the songbook rights to the Wilsons. Which they probably have.

In other words: I don't know. I just don't have the information. Would you just leave me alone already.

Anyway, jenjhis tips:

One of the credited writers of the song Barracuda, Michael DeRosier, just called in to a local (Seattle) radio talk show and basically said Ann & Nancy Wilson of Heart should get a life and he thought it was pretty cool that the song was being played at the RNC.

Here's the Wikipedia entry on the song: Credited writers are shown in the upper right hand of the page.

The podcast of the show will eventually be here. They usually post it around 4 p.m. Pacific. The call is at the very end of the 1st hour.

More update!!! Currently on-air...

Roger Fisher, guitarist for Heart is now calling in (he also co-wrote the song). He's an avid Obama supporter, but also thinks it's great the song was being played at the RNC. This is right at the beginning of the second hour.

More: Allah and I are debating based on our barely-recalled knowledge of performance and songbook rights and the automatic licensing provisions of ASCAP and BMI and all that, and since we don't know shit, the conversation is sort of going nowhere.

Jenjhis writes again:

They cover some of the legal issues in the two interviews (along with saucy! details about the break-up of the band) Political campaigns don't have to pay royalties because they're not-for-profit organizations. And they aren't required to ask permission from the artist.

Holdfast offers--

I could show up at events and play the Guitar Hero version? But only on medium - I can't do difficult.

Well, from what I hear, the "guitarist" Wilson sisters also could only play "their" songs on medium difficulty level -- ohhhhh, snap!!!

Ace is Correct. [Gabe] The writers hold the copyright to the lyrics...unless they've transfered those rights to the Wilson Sisters (or more likely to a record company). The composers hold the copyright to the music...unless they've transfered those rights to the Wilson Sisters (or more likely to a record company). But the Wilson Sisters hold the copyright to their recorded performances...unless they've transfered those rights to a record company.

In short, without more information we don't know who actually owns the rights to the recording used at the convention the other night. This is why, despite the tips and promptings, I didn't write about it.

Also, I'm not as convinced that political campaigns are exempt from complying with copyright law as it sounds like above. Noncommercial users have some exemptions from the usual ASCAP scheme, but that doesn't mean they get to do whatever they want with other people's copyrighted material. And there is the slippery question of whether the convention actually counts as a "noncommercial" use.

Here is what we do know:

The Wilson Sisters are humorless old cranks.
Michael DeRosier and Roger Fisher at least have more business savvy and the presence of mind to seize good publicity.
Sarah Palin still kicks ass.

Podcast Now Up: Here.

Posted by: Ace at 12:39 PM | Comments (115)
Post contains 592 words, total size 4 kb.

Legendary among D&D players is the magic item called "The Deck of Many Things."

Obama's DM was a bit boring, and so gave him The Deck of Precisely One Thing. And this Dummy is still carrying it around with him today.

In fairness, he has slightly reworked his old material. And you may say, "But Islam is not a race!" Well, true, and yet we're always hearing the word "racism" in connection with hatred of Muslims Muslim terrorist and their enablers.

“I know that I’m not your typical presidential candidate,” Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., told executives and employees of the Schott glass company Friday afternoon, “and I just want to be honest with you. I know that.”

“And I know that the temptation is to say, ‘You know what? …The guy hasn’t been there that long in Washington.,’ You know, ‘he’s got funny name,’ You know, ‘we’re not sure about him,’” Obama continued. “And that’s what the Republicans, when they say, ‘This isn’t about issues, it’s about personalities,’ what they’re really saying is, ‘We’re going to try to scare people about Barack. So we’re going to say that you know, maybe he’s got Muslim connections or we’re going to say that, you know, he hangs out with radicals or he’s not patriotic.’"

Umm... all three of those things are true. He does, in fact, have connections to a Hamas terrorist. And he's fast friends with "radicals," whom right thinking people know as "unrepentant terrorists," but whom Barack Obama calls "fixtures of the Chicago mainstream."

Am I to understand that it's out-of-line to note that Barack Obama is best buddies with terrorists, and yet it's an important story that Sarah Palin prayed in church that she hoped we were doing God's work in Iraq?

Curious the connections, friends, and mentors the media considers acceptable and disqualifying!

Hamas terrorist, domestic terrorists, the racist anti-semitic radical Jeremiah Wright: Fine! None of your business! Stop being so racist!

God, Jesus, a standard Christian church: Gob-smackingly vile!

Thanks to Slublog.

Posted by: Ace at 11:50 AM | Comments (52)
Post contains 367 words, total size 3 kb.

Flaming skull? No, not yet. It's not yet confirmed. In fact, it's just overheard hearsay, supposedly from a convention organizer, reported by a blogger.

And there are alternate explanations offered which are just as plausible. (Not to hazard a guess at whom the "disaffected Republicans" who supposedly provided the badges might support, but his name rhymes with Pon Rual (!). )

But I'm rubbing the skull with alcohol, just in case.

I do note, however, that somehow the Democrats managed four nights without a stage-charging incident.

The Republicans suffered one two out of three nights.

Are Democrats merely that much more fascist when it comes to security, or what?

Looks Like Gateway Pundit's Discovered Precisely How the Code Pink Scrunt Got In During Palin's Speech: Rock-solid on that one, it looks like.

That leaves the question of how they got in during McCain's speech, but it's likely by the same sort of tactic.

Thanks to Gabriel Malor and his sissy-pants book-learnin' for straightening out my loose shit.

Posted by: Ace at 11:43 AM | Comments (39)
Post contains 198 words, total size 2 kb.

She can't knock it out of the ballpark every time, and here she's so-so and pretty much just repeats lines from her acceptance speech. McCain, on the other hand, is fiery and authoritative, and shows why he's just no good in a speech format: When he's talking in a speech, his voice is a bit pinched and high pitched, but when he's raising his voice to address a crowd in the outdoors, it's deeper and stronger.

And, of course, it's pretty obvious he doesn't like the artificiality of speeches, but does get invigorated addressing a crowd somewhat extemporaneously.

Why was Sarah Palin deployed to knock Barack Obama on the surge? It's obvious, but I'll state the obvious anyway:

1) To start her talking about foreign policy issues.

2) Because she's the "attack dog" and McCain's the presidential candidate, rising above it to discuss his vision.

and, of course, three:

3) Because Obama wigs out whenever he's challenged by a woman, sweetie, and furthermore, because he absolutely cannot resist the bait of getting into a fight with McCain's junior officer.

Let's see... what stupid statement will the Idiot Messiah (whose grades are closely guarded secret because they're low, baby, low) make about Palin that will boomerang back against him? I'm thinking the Idiot Messiah is just dumb enough to trot out Palin has no recorded opinion on the surge previous to her selection as vice presidential candidate.

Ah. Yes, that'll work, Stupid. She didn't have an opinion, and you had a fiery, passionate, oft-repeated opinion that was catastrophically wrong.

Judgment, baby.

Eh, what do you expect from a C- student at a kinda-crappy unknown little local college.

Allah has a good run-down on polls, media dipshits suddenly realizing "Hey, Palin's kinda an effective pol" (gee, maybe if you guys read a right wing blog in between hours of pouring over the Daily Kos this wouldn't be such a shock to you), Obama toying with the idea that maybe he should just ignore Palin (gee, do you think? Dummy), and a possible new strategy: Mocking McCain because Palin is more popular than he is.

Does Obama really want to highlight the "celebrity" and "famous for being famous" thing again?

And what's he going to say when it turns out Palin is more popular than he is, too?

more...

Posted by: Ace at 11:10 AM | Comments (106)
Post contains 431 words, total size 3 kb.

icasualties has a tendency to overcount casulties sometimes. For example, they counted the discovery of two bodies of soldiers killed a year ago as part of July's casualties.

I don't know of any in August's lists that are dubious, though.

Twelve good American men died in combat, and another 11 died due to noncombat causes. But the trend is obvious, and further, the trend points forward to a number that no one would say is too high: zero.

Do I hit the media bias button too quickly? Perhaps I do. As I myself have had Palinmania, I haven't been posting much news about Iraq, either.

I do know, however, as a certainty, that if August's casualty figures had been high, the media would have interrupted its breathless coverage of the Great National Bristol Palin Preganancy Crisis (Day 5: America at a Crossroads) to mention it.

Thanks to A Better Where.

Posted by: Ace at 10:40 AM | Comments (18)
Post contains 184 words, total size 1 kb.

Apparently the suuuuppper-geniuses at Obama-Biden HQ don't watch TV. Or read the papers. Or surf the internets.

In memos, e-mails and phone calls this week, Obama campaign officials have urged surrogates and allies to mention Republicans who are "nervous" about the Palin pick and to link those worries to George McGovern's aborted vice presidential pick of Thomas Eagleton in 1972, according to three Democratic surrogates.

That year, McGovern rescinded the pick after learning that Eagleton had been treated for depression. Questions about the thoroughness of the Palin vet have been raised, particularly about how and when Palin disclosed the news that her teenage daughter is pregnant and whether Palin's political resume had been thoroughly scrubbed.

Allow me to offer this bit of advice to the Obama camp...if anyone should be worried about being thrown off the ticket, it's McCain. Now of course that's not going to happen but the fact that after everything that happened the Democrats still think their crap is going to work, they are dumber than I thought. Honestly, I didn't know that was possible.

Note to Joe Biden...remember that Eagleton was a Democrat. Take Rudy's advice, get that VP thing in writing.

Posted by: DrewM at 10:37 AM | Comments (46)
Post contains 222 words, total size 2 kb.

Dr. Sanity takes no prisoners:

Idiots of all persuasions are asking this important question: "Did they just cross the line on 9/11? I ask this as a serious question."

They are referring to the fact that the Republicans at their convention DARED to show a video of 9/11. Don't they know that using human suffering for political purposes is taboo???

Except apparently if you are a Democrat. Then you can exploit as many people as possible in even your political ads that are suffering--and blame it all on the Republicans!

It's wonderful how they do that psychological projection stuff. The Democrats/left appeal directly to the emotions over and over again. They show poor people suffering from horrible health care insurance in the US; poor people who have lost their homes and are suffering etc. etc. etc.

But just try to show how 3000 Americans were horribly killed by brutal Islamofacist thugs, who on a daily basis are trying to do repeat the devastation and murder---why, the Dems and their minions are simply disgusted.

This is not new from Democrats. Remember in 2004 how they cried "fearmongering" every time the President mentioned September 11th. They'd like it to be off limits because they are still--after all these years--on the wrong side of that day.

The Boston Globe pipes up with this outright lie:

One of the most enduring taboos in American politics, the airing of graphic images from the September 11 attacks in a partisan context, died today. It was nearly seven years old.

When did we ban "graphic images" of the terrorist attacks? Did I miss another national consensus (maybe Justice Kennedy can catch me up)? Given how eager Democrats are to give Miranda rights to Osama bin Laden, I say we need more reminders of that day.

This is not a game. Osama and Al Qaeda are playing for keeps. And how a politician will respond to a terrorist attack is an important consideration that we need to make before we put them in office. The Daily Kos Media wants to keep people from considering how knee-jerk anti-American the Left was after 9/11.

Let me put it this way. Do we want to elect men and women whose first response to a terror attack is to ask "Why do they hate us?" Or perhaps something more along the lines of "Don't we have a carrier group in the region right now?"

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 09:35 AM | Comments (42)
Post contains 430 words, total size 3 kb.

I was going to sidebar this, but its so shocking it seemed generally noteworthy. Apparently a gang in China has murdered over 100 people so the corpses could be sold to buyers who would substitute the victims in place of their own deceased relatives who were to be cremated. This allowed the people who bought the corpses to quietly bury their relatives on their own. As a land conservation measure, the Chinese have done away with traditional burial and use cremations now.

Chinese police have arrested members of a gang suspected of murdering more than 100 disabled or elderly people and selling their corpses in a bizarre scheme to avoid cremations, a newspaper said.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at 08:20 AM | Comments (17)
Post contains 159 words, total size 1 kb.

The unwed and somewhat hot French Justice Minister is apparently with child. Rumors abound as to who the father is, but I think we all know who it must be... more...

Posted by: Purple Avenger at 07:55 AM | Comments (20)
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.