In negotiations.

I don't see it. Neeson's a good actor and proved he could be an action star in Taken, but I've never seen him do "drolly arrogant" like Hannibal Smith is supposed to be. He does Grim okay, and Nice Guy Everyman all right.

But I don't know of any role where he's done that action-movie confidently-smirking swagger that Bruce Willis does, and George Peppard did as Hannibal. Even if they're doing a more serious version of the A-Team, they can't do it too seriously -- the premise is fundamentally comic. He'll still have to nod in George Peppard's direction. I just can't see him chomping a cigar and saying "I love it when a plan comes together."

In other geek news, "The Lensmen" movie might finally get made, with Ron Howard producing and Babylon 5 writer J. Michael Strazinsky scripting.

If you don't know, the Lensmen is a 30's pulp-era sci-fi series about a squad of galactic cops with psychic powers and laser guns. Kind of the Jedi Knights, but minus the lightsabers, alas, but fortunately also minus George Lucas' determination to ruin the franchise.

Thanks to Arthur for that last bit.

Posted by: Ace at 12:54 PM | Add Comment
Post contains 214 words, total size 1 kb.

Via The New Editor, with the article and a headline that calls unfortunate attention to Obama's moobs.

Remember when the media used to make fun of conservatives for believing George Bush was a good man and pinning so many hopes on him?

Yeah. Good times, good times.

Posted by: Ace at 12:24 PM | Comments (1)
Post contains 63 words, total size 1 kb.

Game over, game over man.

Thanks to commenters for the "shriveled monkey mummy" joke and the picture of Bill "I'm Hudson, he's Hicks" Paxton.

It's kind of foul play to attack someone's family members just because you don't like him or her, eh?

Posted by: Ace at 11:56 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 69 words, total size 1 kb.

It's on...July 13th.

In setting the mid-summer hearing, Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) is bargaining the Senate can approve the first Hispanic high court justice by early August, when Congress takes its summer recess.

"This is a schedule that I think is both fair and adequate - fair to the nominee and adequate for us to prepare for the hearing and Senate consideration," Leahy said. "There is no reason to indulge in needless and unreasonable delay. This is an historic nomination."

Leahy had engaged in long discussions with the top GOP foil on the panel, Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, about the start date.

.."Given the attacks on her character, there are compelling reasons to proceed even ahead of this schedule.

She deserves the earliest opportunity to respond to those attacks," Leahy said.

This apparently comes as a surprise to the ranking Republican member of the committee. more...

Posted by: DrewM at 11:23 AM | Comments (1)
Post contains 249 words, total size 2 kb.

Correction: Commenters tell me that the daughter who accompanied Sarah Palin to the game -- and the one who Letterman would therefore be talking about -- is Willow Palin, not Bristol. Willow was born in 1995 and is therefore 13 or 14.

Question: Obama's older daughter is approaching that age. Can we expect similar knocked-up jokes for her?

Dan Riehl notes the "Chelsea Clinton Rule" seems to only apply to Chelsea Clinton. And Obama's kids, I'm certain.

I had this in the sidebar but it seems to be stirring a lot of anger.

I would note that Letterman, who is 94 years young, "knocked up" his long-term live-in girlfriend accidentally. And that he did not marry his babymama for six years or so since his kid -- technically a bastard during this period -- was born.

I don't really get it. Why is a 17 year old girl to be ridiculed for the same carelessness the 122 year old decrepit fossil David Letterman exhibited?

BTW, I really doubt that was the only time Letterman knocked someone up. I'm guessing this is the first time the woman in question refused an abortion.

He's not just a has-been. He's been a has-been for years. He's actually jumped the shark at being a has-been.

Response: Palin on John Ziegler's show. Audio included.

Posted by: Ace at 11:07 AM | Comments (18)
Post contains 283 words, total size 2 kb.

Demonstrating that lawmakers in Georgia are not the only ones confused, an American citizen just lost his court battle in Switzerland against a member of the ruling family of the United Arab Emirates. Why? Because a belt is apparently not a "dangerous object."

Al Nahyan, brother of the UAE ruler, was convicted in July of hitting Silvano Orsi, 40, of Rochester, New York, with a belt after the American declined a bottle of champagne the sheik offered him in a luxury Geneva hotel bar in 2003. Al Nahyan was fined 10,000 Swiss francs ($9,820).

But in March a Geneva appeals court quashed the conviction of inflicting bodily harm with a dangerous object on the grounds that the belt wasn't dangerous.

Al Nahyan whipped Orsi across the face with the belt. But! Not a a dangerous weapon, says the court. To add insult to insult, the court ordered Orsi (the American) to pay court costs. The court also held that Orsi did not have standing (drink!) to challenge the sheik's acquittal.

I think the lesson here is that when a rich momma's boy sheik who is clearly compensating for something (and violating his own purported religious precepts) offers you champagne, you say "yes."

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 10:10 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 216 words, total size 1 kb.

Really? Pay as you go?

How on earth could you do that? The only way I can think of is to raise tax--

Oh.

I see.

As a nation, we have several imperatives at this difficult moment in our history. We're confronting the worst recession this country has faced in generations, and this has required extraordinary investments in the short term. Another imperative is addressing long-deferred priorities -- health care, energy, education -- which threaten the American economy and the well-being of American families. And we've begun to tackle these problems as well.

But we are also called upon to rein in deficits by addressing these and other challenges in a manner that is fiscally responsible. This, in part, requires the kind of line-by-line review of the budget that is ongoing to remove things that we don't need and make the programs we do need work more efficiently. There are billions of dollars to be saved this way. But much of our effort will entail going after the big-ticket items that drive the deficits.

By ending unnecessary no-bid contracts and reforming the way government contracts are awarded, we can save the American people up to $40 billion every year. In addition, Secretary Robert Gates has proposed a badly needed overhaul of a defense contracting system riddled with hundreds of billions of dollars in cost overruns, and the cancelation of superfluous defense systems unnecessary to combat the threats of the 21st century.

I'll bet.

We're also going to eliminate unwarranted subsidies currently lavished on health insurance companies through Medicare, which will save roughly $177 billion over the next decade. And this is part of broader health reform, about which I'll have more to say in the coming days, which will both cut costs and improve care.

So all told, in the next four years the deficit will be cut in half.

The deficit will continue to be the biggest of all time. He's "cutting" from a $2 trillion kicker.

Over the next decade, non-defense discretionary spending will reach its lowest level as a share of our national income since we began keeping records in 1962.

Whenever a Democrat wants to cut the budget, he looks first, last, and only to the military. Even during a hot war.

But we must go further, and one important step we can and must take is restoring the so-called "pay as you go" rule, or PAYGO. This is a rule I championed in the Senate and called for time and again on the campaign trail. Today, with the support of these legislators, including the Speaker of the House, my administration is submitting to Congress a proposal to codify this rule into law -- and I hope that the House and Senate will act quickly to pass it. (Applause.)

The "pay as you go" rule is very simple. Congress can only spend a dollar if it saves a dollar elsewhere. And this principle guides responsible families managing a budget. And it is no coincidence that this rule was in place when we moved from record deficits to record surpluses in the 1990s -- and that when this rule was abandoned, we returned to record deficits that doubled the national debt. Entitlement increases and tax cuts need to be paid for. They're not free, and borrowing to finance them is not a sustainable long-term policy.

Paying for what you spend is basic common sense. Perhaps that's why, here in Washington, it's been so elusive. Of course, there have been those in Washington leading the charge to restore PAYGO, and many of them are here today. I want to recognize Congressman George Miller, who introduced the first PAYGO bill in the House. (Applause.) I want to thank the House Blue Dogs and their leader, especially Baron Hill, who has been a driving force in favor of PAYGO. (Applause.) I want to acknowledge Senator Claire McCaskill, who's shown real leadership on this issue in the Senate. (Applause.) And as I said, I want to acknowledge the Speaker of the House, as well as leader Steny Hoyer, who are here because they understand the importance of this principle and are fully supportive of our efforts.

In fact, two years ago, a new Democratic Congress put in place congressional rules to restore this principle, but could not pass legislation without the support of the administration. I want you all to know you now have that support. (Applause.)

I really don't even remember Nancy Pelosi "putting in place" such rules. I imagine she did primarily as a catspaw to force Bush to end war funding.

Rush is calling this a sign of "panic" in the White House, as Obama realizes this isn't working and he needs to propose some semi-plausible way to end the huge deficit spending.

Limbaugh is also predicting a GM boycott. Not proposing it, but predicting it.

Posted by: Ace at 09:36 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 822 words, total size 5 kb.

War is over, back to law enforcement.

Ghailani faces multiple charges and, if convicted, could face the death penalty for his role in the bombing of U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, which killed 224 people, including 12 Americans.

"With his appearance in federal court today, Ahmed Ghailani is being held accountable for his alleged role in the bombing of U.S. Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya and the murder of 224 people," Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said in a statement. "The Justice Department has a long history of securely detaining and successfully prosecuting terror suspects through the criminal justice system, and we will bring that experience to bear in seeking justice in this case."

Ghailani was indicted in New York before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, captured three years later and held in a secret CIA prison overseas before being placed in Guantanamo in 2006. Four of his named co-conspirators have already been tried and convicted and are serving life sentences in a super-maximum security prison in Colorado.

Well, I guess that indictment really put the fear of God into al Qaeda! It really stopped them from ever attacking us again. Why wouldn't we want to replicate that wonderful strategy?

Andy McCarthy who led the prosecution of the terrorists in the first WTC bombing and long time critic of trying terrorists in civilian courts is worried.

Of course, the issue has never been whether we can get terrorism convictions in federal courts (and while most terrorists have been securely detained in federal prisons, not all have). The question is whether prosecution in civilian courts is a sound national security strategy given (a) the limited capacity of the system to apprehend and bring international terrorists to trial, and (b) the generous due process rules which force us to disclose skads of intelligence to terrorists — and expose our sources to testify against terrorists — even as their network is still at large and still committed to killing us. That latter seems like it shouldn't be much of a concern with Ghailani, but even this is by no means certain.

The charges entail not only narrow murder counts focused on the bombing but very broad conspiracy charges (including the overarching al-Qaeda conspiracy to murder Americans). Broad charges trigger broad discovery obligations. Rest assured Ghailani's lawyers will ask for every shred of information in the government's files, even for years after the embassy attacks — arguing that, since the government has chosen to charge Ghailani with that conspiracy, and since it contends the al-Qaeda conspiracy continues to this day, Ghailani is entitled to all relevant information in the government's possession regarding al-Qaeda.

Letting the lawyers for terrorists rifle through classified information...what could go wrong?

Posted by: DrewM at 09:36 AM | Comments (1)
Post contains 479 words, total size 3 kb.

I presume they aren't counting every time He says "I" either.

Jesus, like patriotism, is cool again. Thanks Obama.

More than four months into the Obama presidency, a picture is emerging of a chief executive who is comfortable with public displays of his religion — although he has also paid tribute to other faiths and those he called “nonbelievers” during his inaugural address.

Obama’s invocation of the Christian Messiah is more overt than Americans heard in the public rhetoric of Bush in his time in the White House — even though Bush’s victories were powered in part by evangelical voters.

...ObamaÂ’s public embrace of his Christianity so far has not included choosing a church in the capital, and he has attended Sunday services only once since his election, on Easter Sunday. The White House said at the time the family was still looking for a spiritual home in Washington.

Funny how the rules seem to change so suddenly. It might have something to do with the fact that most liberals probably don't think he really means it.

The story goes on to talk about how it was a political danger for Bush to talk about his faith but for Obama it's an opportunity!

Gee, I wonder why it might have been dangerous for Bush to be seen as too religious?

Might it have been because he would get smeared and ridiculed by his supposed betters on the left? Naturally, it never occurred to them that perhaps Bush was simply a main of faith who, despite the left's nightmares to the contrary, never wanted to impose his faith on others or seem to be disrespectful to fellow citizens who didn't share his faith. Nah, couldn't have any of those things.

Being a liberal or a member of the MSM (BIRM) means never having to say you're sorry.

Posted by: DrewM at 08:26 AM | Comments (2)
Post contains 330 words, total size 2 kb.

Rest In Peace.

Wearing a red cap signifying that he is a retired U.S. Marine and an American flag tie, Long's father shared a letter he had written his son in advance of his scheduled departure for his first duty post in South Korea, which had been set for Monday. He advised his son to always do the right thing, to put aside his personal feelings, to follow the orders of the president and his commanding officers.

"You and your brother ... are both heroes for having the moral courage to stand up when your country needs you most," Daris Long read. "You are in my hopes and my thoughts and my prayers. You are my son, you are my hero. I love you. Semper fidelis."

Long's brother, Pfc. Triston Long of Fort Bliss, Texas, gave Long the cavalry branch insignia badge on behalf of his own unit and in honor of Long's Army service.

"My brother taught me valuable lessons and made me the man I am today," Triston Long said. "My commander said, 'Make your brother one of us.' I will miss my brother with all that I am, and I serve in honor of him."

Below the fold is an interview with Private Long's father from the day after the shooting. It's heart wrenching as you can imagine. What really got to me was Mr. Long's gratitude for the people who showed him kindnesses that horrible day. The fact that he wanted to acknowledge them at that horrible moment speaks volumes about the kind of man he seems to be. We can only imagine how much of that was passed on to his children. more...

Posted by: DrewM at 06:59 AM | Comments (29)
Post contains 289 words, total size 2 kb.