Well, it seems that a minor dispute (if it was even that) has been blown up into a conveniently-book-selling scandal.

Either Ridge was lying in 2008 -- not so very long ago -- or he's lying a year later. Hard to take this seriously, especially given that we know that publishers, before agreeing to any kind of advance, demand to see juicy, scandalous revelations in the book proposal.

The most sensational assertion was the pre-election debate in 2004 about the threat level, first reported by U.S. News & World Report. Mr. Ridge writes that the bin Laden tape alone did not justify a change in the nation’s security posture but describes “a vigorous, some might say dramatic, discussion” on Oct. 30 to do so.

“There was absolutely no support for that position within our department. None,” he writes. “I wondered, ‘Is this about security or politics?’ Post-election analysis demonstrated a significant increase in the president’s approval rating in the days after the raising of the threat level.”

Mr. Ridge provides no evidence that politics motivated the discussion. Until now, he has denied politics played a role in threat levels. Asked by Eric Lichtblau of The New York Times if politics ever influenced decisions on threat warnings, he volunteered to take a lie-detector test. “Wire me up,” Mr. Ridge said, according to Mr. Lichtblau’s book, “Bush’s Law.” “Not a chance. Politics played no part.”

So there was a dispute as to the appropriate response and Ridge wondered, he says now, if politics played a role. Well, he earlier he denied that possibility, but even assuming the truth is a bit more nuanced, the most that's possible here (given his previous claim) is that he merely wondered if politics was shaping the Administration position.

It's fine to wonder that -- and, indeed, someone in his position ought to wonder such things. His duties were vital, and it's appropriate to be on guard against all sorts of wrong-headed responses.

But the most that seems to have happened -- assuming Ridge is not a complete fabricator -- is that he "wondered," had no evidence for his wonderment, and ultimately concluded (at least in 200 that his wondering was incorrect.

But now he amps it up and claims that it was quite a bit more than wondering.

Meh.

Oh, Bush officials deny this and express puzzlement at the allegation, which they're hearing for the first time now, it seems. But I think Ridge's statement is the one that's dispositive.

Posted by: Ace at 06:31 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 458 words, total size 3 kb.

FRIDAY!

Oh. Comments still down. Well, this is a placeholder for the Top Headline Comments you know you have, but just can't share.

[DrewM.] Comments Are Back!

[Pixy] Sorry 'bout that. The log files filled up all the disk space on the virtual server. Cleared the logs and increased the disk quota.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 05:21 AM | Comments (2)
Post contains 58 words, total size 1 kb.

The Department of Justice is investigating whether military lawyers may have shown their 'clients' photos of covert CIA agents.

Investigators are looking into allegations that laws protecting classified information were breached when three lawyers showed their clients the photographs, the sources said. The lawyers were apparently attempting to identify CIA officers and contractors involved in the agency's interrogation of al-Qaeda suspects in facilities outside the United States, where the agency employed harsh techniques.

If detainees at the U.S. military prison in Cuba are tried, either in federal court or by a military commission, defense lawyers are expected to attempt to call CIA personnel to testify.

The photos were taken by researchers hired by the John Adams Project, a joint effort of the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, to support military counsel at Guantanamo Bay, according to the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the inquiry. It was unclear whether the Justice Department is also examining those organizations.

What in the world is going on Gitmo that left wing groups are taking photos of covert CIA agents? Aren't their identities supposed to among our most closely guarded secrets but the ACLU has a scrap book filled with their photos?

These commissions aren't even full fledged criminal proceedings and this kind of security breach may be happening. What is going to go on when (not if) these guys wind up in open federal court?

This is simply madness.

Oh...remember when the left was worried about this sort of thing? Remember when it was 'treason'? But these CIA agents actually had to deal with people who want to and have killed Americans. Clearly they won't be afforded the same kind of protection and love by the left that Valerie Plame was.

Posted by: DrewM at 04:17 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 325 words, total size 2 kb.

Three important things to remember in a case like this....

1- Don't Panic

2- Blame Bush

3- Keep Checking Back, It Will All Be Over Soon

Posted by: DrewM at 03:46 AM | Comments (1)
Post contains 60 words, total size 1 kb.

It's been a while so let's take a moment to catch up with what's been happening on the undead front.

First stop - Japan. The Fuji-Q Highland amusement park in Japan felt that their zombie staff had lost their edge and just weren't scary enough so they put all their z-associates through a zombie boot camp. Of course being Japanese this involved a lot of yelling, organized calisthenics, and the occasional beating with sticks. You can watch it all here.

And here's some video from a Japanese game show where they had a zombie attack little kids in their house but only after first sending a warning letter (apparently J-Zombies are very polite). And terror, pant wetting, and hilarity ensues. Sure it seems cruel but it's just this sort of tough love that will build the zombie-fighting warriors that we will need in the future.

more...

Posted by: Open Blog at 01:56 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 433 words, total size 4 kb.

The head of the US Pan Am Flight 103 victim's group was told there would be, "no celebratory reactions on the part of the Libyans".

The Obama administration said they expected the killer's homecoming would be low key.

A senior State Department official made clear that punitive measures could result if Libya treated Megrahi as a hero, but declined to be more specific.

"Gaddafi is looking for better relations with the United States and the international community and if he wants to be seen as a responsible leader in the region and beyond, this would be an opportunity for him to prove it," said the official, who declined to be named.

Judge for yourself how that's all worked out. more...

Posted by: DrewM at 06:25 PM | Comments (1)
Post contains 159 words, total size 2 kb.

No kittens tonight. Just solid, serious ONT discussion material.

And here we go...

Item #1: 5 Disturbingly Specific Magazines
Nowadays bookstores carry more magazines than you can shake a stick at - easily over 1000+ titles. Most are just variations on existing themes (cars, sports, crafts, etc.), but occasionally you come across a magazine that exposes you to a demographic that you never even knew existed before. And the mags at the bookstores are just the ones with mass appeal. There are many other magazines out there that cater to really niche-y groups.

The link above has some good ones but I've found a few more. Note that the rules require that the periodical in question actually be printed and sold somewhere which rules out otherwise worthy contenders such as Modern Drunkard Magazine. [Update: The Drunken Conservative who seems to know whereof he speaks points out that you can indeed buy print subscriptions to MDM] Here they are:

1. Sheep! The voice of the independent flockmaster.
2. American Coin-Op The monthly magazine devoted to owners of self-serve laundries.
3. Girls and Corpses Apparently for the heterosexual zombie aficionado. Personally I prefer to keep my vices separate but to each his own. [warning: borderline NSFW]
4. Mushing The international magazine of dog powered adventure.
5. Transgender Tapestry I think you all can guess what demographic this is for.
6. ¡Alarma! A Mexican magazine dedicated to graphic photos of death, decapitations, and scantily-clad women. It's so graphic that I won't even link to it - you'll have to find it on your own.

But here is my favorite one of all:
Bacon Busters Australia's only magazine dedicated to pig hunting. I'm particularly curious about the Babes and Boars section.

Posted by: Open Blog at 06:00 PM | Add Comment
Post contains 423 words, total size 4 kb.

I'm sorry, this site is becoming nothing but poll updates with occasional news articles, but the polls seize my interest. Apologies if you are sick of the numbers. I promise, to make it up to you, I will vigilantly fail to report poll numbers should they turn back Obama's way.

That's the Ace of Spades Vow.

Lowest mark yet found by any pollster.

President Barack Obama's popularity has plummeted to a record low, with just 45 percent of voters now approving of his performance as commander in chief, according to the latest Zogby International poll.

Asked whether they approve or disapprove of the president's job performance, just 45.3 percent of likely voters say they approve. That compares with 50.5 percent who disapprove of the job Obama is doing.

The results are a strong indication that contentious national debate over healthcare reform has taken a major toll on the president's popularity.

Those numbers also indicate that Obama clearly is in serious political trouble, Fox News analyst and best-selling author Dick Morris tells Newsmax.

"As soon as Obama dropped below 52 percent . . . he was leaking real voters who had backed him in November," Morris tells Newsmax. "Now that he is down to 45 percent among likely voters . . . he is in deep political trouble."

Of greatest concern to Obama may well be his decline among all-important independent voters. Just 37.5 percent of self-identified independents say they approve of how Obama is handling the presidency. That compares with 59.2 percent of independents who disapprove.

Thanks to Robert.

Posted by: Ace at 04:18 PM | Add Comment
Post contains 269 words, total size 2 kb.

Absolute Moral Authority(tm) ain't what it used to be.

And you look at somebody like that and you think here's somebody who's just trying to find some meaning in her son's death. And you have to be sympathetic to her. Anybody who has given a son to this country has made an enormous sacrifice, and you have to be sympathetic. But enough already.

Thanks for your service Cindy, now get with the new program.

Found via Newsbusters which has a rundown of Gibson's previous take on Sheehan's protests. I think it's fair to say he used to have a much more nuanced view.

Remember when President Bush said, "Enough already" to Sheehan because the time for talk was over? Me too.

Well, she was reported to the authorities to be straightened out, right? You know, I'm starting to think Bush didn't really understand that whole fascist thing.

Always lost in a conversation about Cindy Sheehan is the fact that her son Casey is an honest to God, American hero. He wasn't a dimwitted kid conned into joining the Army. He was a man who reenlisted knowing full well he'd be sent to Iraq. He didn't have to be on the mission where he died. Again, he volunteered to be a part of a quick reaction force that was assembled to rescue ambushed soldiers.

His mom is what she is. None of that changes who he was and we shouldn't let her over shadow his memory.

Posted by: DrewM at 03:25 PM | Comments (14)
Post contains 263 words, total size 2 kb.

Actually, he seems to be modeling a 6-12 seat loss, but then tosses out those models based on gut on other factors and figures it's just as likely the Dems will lose more than twenty seats as they'll lose less than twenty seats.

20+ seats is a bit of small beer after lefty blogger Nate Silver predicted 20-50 was a likely range. But still.

"Many veteran Congressional election watchers, including Democratic ones, report an eerie sense of déjà vu, with a consensus forming that the chances of Democratic losses going higher than 20 seats is just as good as the chances of Democratic losses going lower than 20 seats."

Cook scrupulously avoided any mention that Democratic control of the House is in jeopardy but, noting a new Gallup poll showing CongressÂ’ job disapproval at 70 percent among independents, concluded that the post-recess environment could feel considerably different than when Congress left in August.

"We believe it would be a mistake to underestimate the impact that this mood will have on Members of Congress of both parties when they return to Washington in September, if it persists through the end of the Congressional recess."

It's not all sunshine, though. The dribs and drabs of the poll the Washington Post is releasing on the installment plan makes it clear how high a hill we have yet to climb.

Question 901 (yeah, 901, but it's not that far down): On partisan affiliation, 35% say Democrat, and another 15% lean Democratic. 50% is the grim number there.

Only 25% of the country self-identifies as Republican, with another 14% leaning our way.

Absent continuing bad news for Obama & Co., then, we need to hold all of our own and pick up all the true unaffiliateds just break even with the Democrats.

This is a reason not to be all dismissive of attempting to attract moderates. You might call it selling out. I tend to call it acknowledging reality. We do need to pick up the support of people not inclined to vote for us. And not just a few of those; most of those, at least as the situation now stands.

Thanks to AHFF Geoff for the WaPo tip.

Posted by: Ace at 01:50 PM | Comments (2)
Post contains 421 words, total size 3 kb.