You know why?

Bush isn't President anymore. Now the jurors are free to evaluate films based on artistic merit and not automatically give the Rotund Rabble-Rouser top honors for his idiotic Filmmaking 101 college movies.

Posted by: Ace at 12:08 PM | Comments (1)
Post contains 55 words, total size 1 kb.

Not many details yet, except "residences" in Queens were raided. And the FBI plans on briefing senior members of Congress -- which seems significant.

Hmmmm... From Friday on ABCNews, a mention that the NYPD Counterterrorism Task Force is specifically looking out for Iran-backed groups lately.

Does this mean anything? It could -- sometimes, when someone gets a scoop, the media doesn't run it (assuming the President is a Democrat, I mean) in exchange for some background stuff it's safer to disclose.

Bomb Plot: All the materials needed, a fellow resident in the building says.

More: Three houses, in Flushing. None of the bombs were ready to detonate. No arrests yet -- just searches.

Religion of perpetrators unknown.

Most likely Christians, as Max Blumenthal claims in an ill-timed The Nation screed that Christianity is uniquely responsible for mass-killings... and, um, Satanism.

Al Qaeda Wannabes? From Drew, this post:

Updated, 4:45 p.m. | A senior law enforcement official said authorities had not detected a specific plot or target of any planned attack, but had uncovered a small group of people who espoused a militant ideology aligned with Al Qaeda and whose activities had aroused enough suspicion to obtain warrants for the searches and arrests, which began late Sunday night.

The official said authorities had only a hazy view of the group, its operations and goals, but decided to act fearing that undercover surveillance had failed to detect plans that might be developing.

Listen closely -- that sound you don't hear is the sound of no one on the left calling this a "distraction" or some ginned-up political stunt.

Posted by: Ace at 12:02 PM | Comments (1)
Post contains 278 words, total size 2 kb.

This "confusion" thing is the meme of the day, I guess.

Conservatives cannot oppose anything on legitimate grounds. We only can oppose out of fear, anger, hatred and ignorance/confusion.

Why, in a grassroots, self-motivated gathering of upwards of a million people, there was no centrally-planned and collectively-approved main message!

Obviously this proves we're confused and also racist. And it also proves were Astroturf, I think, because real grassroots demonstrations always have pre-printed collective-approved signage.

Seeking Healing, Seeing Hostility

...

On Saturday, tens of thousands of protesters thronged to the U.S. Capitol to angrily accuse President Obama of taking the country in the wrong direction. A day later, in the shadow of the Washington Monument, many participants at a much smaller gathering -- the 24th annual Black Family Reunion -- said the level of hostility toward the nation's first African American president had little to do with policy differences over health care or taxes and everything to do with race.

"It' s not conducive to the coalitions we need to build in this country," said Vera Hope, 60, of Mount Rainier as she left a booth promoting health prevention. "I'm disgusted and upset by the hostility. Let's call it was it is -- it's just a disguise for right-wing racists. They are fomenting a climate of violence to provoke people."

...

Colleen Freeman, 50, said many of Obama's critics are motivated by race. "A lot of people are protesting, and they don't even know what they are protesting," she said. "Some of these folks are getting Social Security, and it's because their grandparents put in the work for it. Now they won't give Obama a chance to work. Some know they need health care but don't want it to be Obama that gives it to them."

Some might defend the WaPo as merely covering another protest. But this was a tiny gathering, thrown together explicitly to repudiate the 9/12 demonstration (something the WaPo fails to note), and the WaPo is obviously using these people as sockpuppets to broadcast their own disdain for the 9/12 demonstrators.

Posted by: Ace at 10:00 AM | Comments (2)
Post contains 360 words, total size 2 kb.

Not just AP and not just ObamaCare, either; only 29% of Americans think that the media "generally" gets its facts right. That's their lowest mark since such questions were asked, starting in 1985.

SAN FRANCISCO – The news media's credibility is sagging along with its revenue.

Nearly two-thirds of Americans think the news stories they read, hear and watch are frequently inaccurate, according to a poll released Sunday by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press...

The poll didn't distinguish between Internet bloggers and reporters employed by newspapers and broadcasters, leaving the definition of "news media" up to each individual who was questioned. The survey polled 1,506 adults on the phone in late July.

Heh. Get that? They're trying to suggest the public is "confused" about what is meant by "the media," and perhaps this huge level of skepticism and disparagement is due to mistrust of bloggers.

Look, bloggers get stuff wrong all the time. But I really doubt that when the public is knocking "the media," they really mean bloggers.

I think that when the public says "the media" they actually mean "the media."

A small fraction of the public routinely gets its news from blogs.

So, no, AP. When the public says they don't trust you, they mean they don't trust you. They don't mean "Oh I love the AP, they get everything right, but those damned bloggers 'in the media' keep screwing everything up for everyone else so I'll give 'the media' a bad rating."

The survey found that 63 percent of the respondents thought the information they get from the media was often off base. In Pew Research's previous survey, in 2007, 53 percent of the people expressed that doubt about accuracy.

The findings indicate U.S. newspapers and broadcasters could be alienating the audiences they are struggling to keep as they try to survive financial turmoil.

Could be.

But you know whose fault that is? The bloggers.

"The great flood that goes under the heading `news media' has been poisoned by junk blogs, gossip sheets, shout radio and cable-TV partisans that don't deserve to be trusted," Keller told The Associated Press in an e-mail.

...

Carroll hopes the increased scrutiny and accountability fostered by the Internet will lead to better journalism.

Don't count on it. The MSM doubles down on its mistakes. For example, would you believe it? When a poll finds that the public doesn't trust their competence or integrity, they attempt to blame that on bloggers, who are in no one's estimation "the media."

Similarly, only 26 percent of the respondents said the press is careful to avoid bias. The figure was 36 percent in 1985.

Blogs are killing trust in the media, but not in the way the AP laughingly suggests.

74% Say the Media Favors "One Side" in Political/Social Matters: A fraction seem to think the media is biased towards conservatives (I don't believe they really believe that, by the way: they are just lying to push the media further left), but a full 50% say the media favors liberal positions.

Posted by: Ace at 09:47 AM | Comments (1)
Post contains 530 words, total size 4 kb.

For anything you have not of the newsy variety you might have.

Which brings me to this...tipping. A friend of mine just called with a dilemma, to tip the guys delivering her new stove or not?

I say yes, $10 or so each. more...

Posted by: DrewM at 09:16 AM | Comments (1)
Post contains 143 words, total size 1 kb.

Not really anything we didn't know, but still nice to see acknowledged. (Link at Riehl.)

Of course, this being AP, they propose a novel reason why the Democrats may lose.

Is it because Democrats are attempting to take this country in a direction the majority of the public rejects?

No. It's because Republicans are "confused" by Obama's health care proposals.

Not that we understand them and reject them. That we're confused.

And, by the way: Most independents are also against the plan, but oddly enough the AP doesn't deem them confused. Only Republicans.

Despite sweeping Democratic successes in the past two national elections, continuing job losses and President Barack Obama's slipping support could lead to double-digit losses for the party in next year's congressional races and may even threaten their House control.

...

From New Hampshire to Nevada, House Democrats also will be forced to defend votes on Obama's $787 billion economic recovery package and on energy legislation viewed by many as a job killer in an already weak economy.

Add to that the absence of Obama from the top of the ticket, which could reduce turnout among blacks, liberals and young people, and the likelihood of a highly motivated GOP base confused by the president's proposed health care plan and angry at what they consider reckless spending and high debt.

And angry, of course. I think that's correct -- we are angry -- but the MSM always endeavors to paint conservative motivations as emanating from the baser emotions of fear, anger, and hatred.

And confusion. Is confusion an emotion? Close enough.

Uh-Oh: Rasmussen Puts Support at ObamaCare at 51%: And support has been rising "consistently" since the speech, up five points from 46% at its low point.

Since the Democrats are likely to try to ram this through via the "reconciliation" process, Dafydd has written a great piece on what this process is, and the limitations on it.

There is one problem here. Many big procedural questions in the Senate are actually ruled on by the Parliamentarian, a citizen expert in parliamentary procedure as employed by the US Senate.

This position is ostensibly non-partisan but he's picked by whatever party is in control.

Further, his rulings are not binding. Typically, they are echoed by the Presiding Officer of the Senate (whatever Senator happens to be occupying that post at the moment).

Dafydd's post notes that reconciliation is not really applicable to ObamaCare and the parliamentarian should rule against most efforts to ram its provisions through. But that assumes 1) the Parliamentarian actually does his job rather than throwing the rules out for the Democrats and 2) whatever hyperpartisan Senator is serving as Presiding Officer follows the Parliamentarian's ruling.

I have small doubts about 1 and huge doubts about 2. I think they're determined to ram this through and they don't care about precedent or consequences.

Posted by: Ace at 08:43 AM | Comments (2)
Post contains 502 words, total size 4 kb.

Keith Olbermann is a reprehensible swine, on a good day. The last thing I want to see when I turn on the television to watch the greatest rivalry on earth (Packers v. Bears) is the smirking face of the least talented, least fair, least honest person on television doing the pre-game show. It turned my stomach and I turned the channel. I did the same at halftime and I'm certainly not the only one. Olbermann is not funny anymore and he is such a partisan scumbag that it is an insult to football fans to have him anywhere near the greatest sport there is. So let's get him booted off. I wrote an email to NBC Sports President Dick Ebersol and so should you. Tell your friends, send Rush a note, Tell O' Reilly, let's put the screws to these people and get that scumbag off our football and back to the channel where all 50 of his fans watch him.

dick.ebersol@nbcuni.com
nbcsportshelp@nbcuni.com

Posted by: Uncle Jimbo at 07:33 AM | Comments (3)
Post contains 173 words, total size 1 kb.

The crowd-size estimator was provided for the Obama Inauguration, when USAToday may have had an interest in overstating the size of crowds.

Nevertheless. they cannot claim their guide is good in one situation and not in another.

And according to that estimator, the Tea Party drew over a million people.

Some Funny Signs: Hand-made, note. Not created by Organizing for America.

Here and here are some funny ones. The album's here.

Plus... The Boob Czar.

Posted by: Ace at 07:09 AM | Comments (2)
Post contains 101 words, total size 1 kb.

Not exactly breaking news...the guy is a Douchdnozzle.

Much to her credit, Beyonce was having none of West's idiocy and did a very kind thing.

Quick question...why does MTV still give out music video awards? I didn't think they've played videos for almost 20 years.

Now let's get back to ignoring MTV.

Kanye West Is Stupid [ace]: I mean, you know he's stupid, but he's more stupid than maybe you know.

The MTV awards apparently follow a fairly conventional rule for awards shows. Let's say a video like Beyonce's Single Ladies is nominated for Video of the Year, and several lesser, more particular honors -- like Female Video of the Year.

In the MTV awards, as with many awards shows, if the committee gives you the Big Spankin' Award, you're automatically out of the running for the lesser ones. Yeah, it kinda doesn't make sense that Beyonce could have the Video of the Year but not the Female Video of the Year, but a lot of awards shows do this, to "spread the wealth," as it were.

Anyway, idiot Kanye West was claiming that Beyonce's song was the video of the year, and he ruined this Taylor Swift's moment of joy to say so. Well, not only was this classless, but Beyonce was actually still in the hunt for the honor of Video of the Year -- and, in fact, won precisely that. That's the award she gets when she steps aside to let Taylor Swift have an uninterrupted moment to shine.

Kanye West knows how these shows work all too well, as he routinely cries like a bitch and whines when he fails to win top honors. So this dope knew that Beyonce probably was winning the Video of the Year, or at least may have been winning that, when he interrupted a 17-year-old girl's special moment to scream that Beyonce had the video the year.

Yeah. She did. MTV said so. Maybe you should just let them wait to say so before being a jackass and ruining this newcomer's moment.

Posted by: DrewM at 07:07 AM | Comments (1)
Post contains 358 words, total size 3 kb.

This recent scam, which was attempted in San Diego, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Philadelphia to name a few places, had failed for months before the results weÂ’ve all recently seen.
-Bertha Lewis, Chief Organizer, ACORN

Not so much on the fail part.

Here they get interesting tax advice regarding their brothel: Get a tin, bury it in th backyard, fill it with money.

Posted by: Ace at 06:51 AM | Comments (2)
Post contains 82 words, total size 1 kb.