Right in the headline:

Let them explain:

The caricature of Obama as a profligate queen relies on the racist stereotype of an "uppity Negro," which emerged among slave masters in an earlier American era. Obama, born into a working-class Chicago family whose roots are traced to the pre-Civil War South, graduated from Princeton University and Harvard Law School, prior to holding several high-level positions in the academic and private sectors.

The racist image appeared Tuesday on the right-wing blog Gateway Pundit; the slur was later called out by Media Matters for America. A post by Gateway blogger Jim Hoft paired the picture with a clip of the first lady's guest appearance on a forthcoming episode of "iCarly," a Nickelodeon sit-com. In the script, Obama commends the cast for their support of military families. Responding to a cast member who mistakenly addresses her as "your excellency," the script has Obama jokingly reply, "I kinda like it."

You know what other stereotype it relies upon? The actual historical memory of Marie Antoinette (whether or not that's fair) as a profligate queen who thought rules were for the little people, and who lived in high style while saying (I know she didn't say this) "Let them eat cake."

But oh, right, no it can't be what it's obviously about. It's got to be about that slave thing. Because.

What?

Unless there are some racial caricatures in that facial rendering which I'm unable to detect due to the low resolution of this photo, there is absolutely nothing "racist" here at all.

Oh, and her buff guns? Yeah I had to read 300 media puff-pieces about how terrific her biceps were, as if men around the world are saying, "What I want is a gal with pythons that could strangle an ox."

That's your baby, Media.

The left is simply now saying "racist" equals "mean."

Yes, it is mean. Mean is not racist. Idiots.

Posted by: Ace at 02:49 PM | Comments (329)
Post contains 345 words, total size 2 kb.

The tide of war is receding. Well, that's not like the oceans falling, as he promised, but if Obama says it, it must be true.

Declaring that "the tide of war is receding," President Obama Thursday ordered a shift from the nation's longstanding capability to fight two major conflicts at once.

The new strategy, which critics will surely brand as a retreat...

There's a reason critics would "surely" say that.

For example, critics will brand the sun's setting as the onset of night. See, that's what it actually is.

... calls for being able to fight one major conventional conflict while conducting numerous unconventional operations elsewhere, such as policing actions, counterterrorism and disaster relief.

...

The Pentagon must, however shed lingering and costly Cold War capabilities to live within new constraints set by Congress to cut debt and budget deficits, [Obama] said in remarks at the Pentagon briefing room.

“Even as our forces prevail in today's missions, we have the opportunity — and the responsibility — to look ahead to the force we are going to need for the future," Obama said.

A future in which Al Qaeda isn't a threat and Iran doesn't have a lot of nuclear swagger.

Ooops, huh?

I've got an idea: Let's start heavily promoting the Chevy Volt in Iran and Pakistan.

Win win win.

Posted by: Ace at 01:34 PM | Comments (356)
Post contains 273 words, total size 2 kb.

That's a dumb dare. Because on the off-chance (very off chance) that Gingrich wasn't going to say it to Romney's face tomorrow night, now he must, right?

Gingrich said he’s running for president, not for personal gain, but because he wants to help the country: “And I think I can help the United States of America by being an honest citizen and telling the truth. And I believe actually, in the end, we will win doing that. I think we'll do better in New Hampshire than people expect, because when you start to describe a Massachusetts moderate (a reference to Mitt Romney) and you remind people of his record, and suddenly they go, ‘Oh, yeah – he’s not a conservative.’ It's a joke for him to call himself a conservative. It's a Saturday Night Live skit.”

Romney's surrogate John Sununu responds:

Gingrich's anger is not really about Romney, Sununu suggested. "It's because he got caught by his colleagues. Peter King, I think, made the most accurate point that unfortunately in Newt Gingrich's world, if something is good for Newt Gingrich, then that becomes the truth for him. Most of what you're hearing from Gingrich has nothing to do with the reality of his record, or anyone else's record."

A few minutes before the interview, Sununu was asked on Fox News about Gingrich's charge that Romney approved taxpayer-funded abortions while governor of Massachusetts -- an accusation Romney strongly denies. Does Sununu expect that issue to come up during two debates this weekend? "I don't think Mr. Gingrich has the guts to say it to Gov. Romney's face," Sununu said. "He is wrong. It is dishonest for him to say thatÂ…Mr. Gingrich has a little difficulty with the truth."

Sununu's charges come just days after Gingrich accused Romney of being a liar. "Somebody who will lie to you to get to be president will lie to you when they are president," Gingrich said.

And that non-aggression pact with Santorum? Not on.

“He’s not a bad person, I want to be clear about this, but I don’t know that [Santorum] has any track record of being able to organize a large-scale campaign.”

Well that's true. That's why I keep pushing governors, but the party has decided to throw out everything it once knew about elections, because All The Rules Are Different Now or something.

Tomorrow night should be a hoot. I have to admit big bias here: Because my guy is an also-ran, I am predisposed to rooting for injuries.

Posted by: Ace at 12:26 PM | Comments (338)
Post contains 444 words, total size 3 kb.

"The question ultimately revolves around one issue, that one demands our total support, with power, determination, and one voice, and it is this: Does Islam, or does it not, force people, by the Power of the Sword, to submit to its authority corporally, if not spiritually? The answer is Yes."

That is Osama bin Ladin's own statement about why Islamists must destroy the west and force the west into submission. Glenn Beck quotes this in response to Ron Paul's blabblings.

Ron Paul blabbles claims it's because we have bases in Saudi Arabia and Jews in Israel.

(Yes I'm trying to get "blabblings" off the ground. And I've clarified to let people know Glenn Beck is disagreeing with Paul sharply; the headline is understated for humorous effect.)

Posted by: Ace at 11:01 AM | Comments (366)
Post contains 148 words, total size 1 kb.

I'm not going to spin this, because it's objectively good for Obama.

And further, if I spin it, I'm taking part in a counterproductive thing, pretending away facts.

Some think, however, that this will be as good as it gets for the next year or so.

Combine this news with this and I'm almost ready to make myself endorse Romney.

The next questioner was a veteran and asked him about the VeteransÂ’ Affairs system.

Before answering, Santorum told the audience about a radio interview out of Boston he did earlier today.

According to Santorum, the interviewer said, ‘We don’t need a Jesus candidate, we need an economic candidate.’

‘My answer to that,’ Santorum added, ‘was we always need a Jesus candidate.

"‘We need someone who believes in something more than themselves and not just the economy,’ he added. ‘When we say, ‘God bless America,’ do we mean it or do we just say it?’”

Well then I'm afraid we're in disagreement, because I really want a candidate who "believes" in fixing the economy, and I do not particularly care about which faith he believes to be the true and accurate Word of God.

This idea that we're going to Run on Jesus, when there are more pressing and less metaphysical concerns, and Obama is not as weak as we'd like him to be (or as weak as he really ought to be), is nuts.

Posted by: Ace at 09:16 AM | Comments (646)
Post contains 262 words, total size 2 kb.

"Civilian federal workers" is a euphemism for "Obama's base in Northern Virginia".

Here's the proposal.

The White House will propose a 0.5 percent pay increase for civilian federal employees as part of its 2013 budget proposal, according to two senior administration officials familiar with the plans.

The modest cost of living increase in federal compensation would be the first pay jump for federal workers since before President Obama ordered a two-year freeze in late 2010.

The proposal, which requires congressional approval, differs from Republican plans supported by lawmakers and presidential candidates that would freeze federal compensation for at least one more year. In recent weeks, GOP lawmakers have called for extending the pay freeze as a way to pay for a payroll tax extension.

This needs congressional approval you say? I hope the GOP offers the following counter-proposal: 15% of you are fired.

Quality snark from "Political Math" on Twitter.

Pro tip: Don't announce raises for bureaucrats the day after you announce you're firing 10,000 soldiers.

Of course we can afford all of this now because unemployment is plummeted to 8.5% and happy days are here again according to the Associated Press.

(Sorry for the blatant link whoring to my little site but I thought someone else would have done a post on it here and I don't want to bother redoing the whole thing)

Posted by: DrewM at 08:17 AM | Comments (156)
Post contains 245 words, total size 2 kb.

This compilation of Rick Santorum clips was in my email this morning. I get the feeling it was filmed back in 2010 when Rand Paul flubbed that answer on the Civil Rights Act, but I don't know for sure. The first segment is a short answer on that. In the second segment, he opposes libertarians and libertarian influence. In the third, he states his "concerns" with the movement within the Republican Party and the Tea Party to "refashion conservatism." Finally, there's his defense of earmarks in the final segment, which is the most passionate defense of earmarks I've ever seen.

This is the Tea Party's current alternative to Romney? Happy Friday.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:46 AM | Comments (617)
Post contains 119 words, total size 1 kb.

A Rebel Lecture From Deep Within the Death Star

So the EU Innovation Convention in Brussels severely screwed up - and invited an actual innovator, Michael O'Leary, CEO of Ryanair, to their meeting in December. [For those of you unfamiliar with Ryannair it's a European airline famous for being utterly no-frills and offering flights within Europe for as low as 10€ each way]

And O'Leary proceeded to eloquently and entertainingly explain to his captive audience why the EU and its executive commission sucks, why Brussels is the heart of the EU evil empire, and how the EU Innovation Convention is a itself a black hole of innovation.

I'm guessing someone got severely chastised for allowing the real world to taint their mutual admiration society. It's pretty amusing to watch the nervous laughter from the audience. Most of the attendees probably came to hob-knob with their fellow technocrats and instead they got a character straight out of Atlas Shrugged. If you enjoy Nigel Farage's rants against his fellow EU parliament members, then you'll definitely enjoy this talk.

[video below the fold] more...

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:12 PM | Comments (821)
Post contains 1065 words, total size 9 kb.

Given that I'd like Santorum to fail, I'm naturally inclined to want this to be true.

Problem? It's not. In mid-sentence, he seems to have stumbled over whether his next word would be "people" or "lives." He corrects it, in the end, to "people's lives," but with a non-word before it.

The word isn't "black." It's just not a word at all. It's a slur of p and b (closely related labials ) and lie as he can't figure out it's going to be lives or people's lives he says next.

To the extent he said any word at all, he came closest to saying "Bligh." So he's apparently against giving money to mutineered captains. Which, actually, is sensible enough. Look, don't get mutineed, dude. We shouldn't subsidize losing control of your ship.

See for yourself.

Also note that that is CBSNews online claiming that this stutter was a racial slur, not some stupid blog. CBSNews probably got it from a blog, of course.

But now they're just running that claim. If I could tell he didn't say black, how did CBSNews be so sure he did say it?

There's a trick going 'round which idiots in the newsmedia haven't seen, I guess. In 2007, video was released of old Clinton strategist and Hillary crony Mickey Kantor calling rural white people "worthless white n*ggers."

That's what the helpful text at the bottom of the video said, at least. And when you saw it, the text supplied you with the words you then expected to hear, and you heard it.

But he didn't say anything of the sort. Not even remotely close. I can't remember what he said, but it was something utterly benign that made no mention of whites or blacks or anything. It was something like "We're winning this," something absurdly far away from "worthless white n*ggers."

So now CBSNews is playing the role that hyperpartisan campaign operatives and bloggers used to play in creating verbal gaffes which didn't even happen.

On O'Reilly, Santorum denied saying it. He's right. He didn't. It's just CBSNews running "worthless white n*ggers" beneath him.

By the way, I still think it's a big mistake to nominate him. If conservatives really think the public is hankering for a social conservative who thinks the state should have the right to forbid birth control -- well, enjoy guys, and wake me up in 2016 after Obama's done with his two (??? -- only two?) terms.

The McGurk Effect: Not sure this is on-point -- but a very, very interesting illusion involving lip-reading.

When you watch this guy say "Bah bah bah," with b lip movements, you hear "bah bah bah." But when the audio is synced to him mouthing out "fah fah fah," you hear "fah fah fah" -- despite the fact that, actually, it's always "bah bah bah."

more...

Posted by: Ace at 04:17 PM | Comments (485)
Post contains 514 words, total size 3 kb.

A-List? Well, let's put it this way: He's a director I've heard of. So that's something.

Director David O. Russell started out with a movie called Spanking the Monkey, which I never saw, but I think it was about a teenager who wanted to have sex with his mom.

He did Flirting with Disaster, with Ben Stiller and Tea Leoni, which was pretty darned funny, but sexually bent.

Then he did that stupid Three Kings movie.

Now he's feeling up transsexuals.

He uses a line here which I'm pretty sure no man accused of groping a transsexual has ever used in his own defense. See if you can spot it.

Oh by the way, the tranny is Russell's mother's adopted brother's son. So that makes him/her his... adoptive niece or nephew? His niecephew?

According to a Broward SheriffÂ’s Office report, Russell, 53, and Nicolas Peloquin, 19, were working out in the gym at the Embassy Suites in Deerfield Beach. Peloquin, who also uses the first name Nicole, told a sheriffÂ’s deputy that Russell is his mother's adopted brother.

While in the gym last Friday afternoon, Peloquin told Deputy Debbra Bridgman that Russell offered “to help…with ab exercises.” While doing this, the director’s hand was above Peloquin’s “private parts,” according to the sheriff’s report. Peloquin, who told the deputy that he is “a transgender but has not gone through the male to female operation,” said that Russell then asked him about the transgender transformation. Peloquin replied by telling Russell about “the hormones to increase his breasts.”

Russell claims the touching happened, but was consensual, because he wanted to grope his transsexual adoptive nicenephew's fake breasts and he/she said yes. You know, same old story. Hear it every day.

Curious about the breast enhancement, Russell told the deputy that Peloquin allowed him “to feel both of his breasts.” The Hollywood [director] added that Peloquin “asked him to ‘pinky swear’ about her letting him touch his breasts.”

...

Russell also told the deputy that Peloquin is “always causing drama since the transgender transformation and has become very provocative and seductive."

So there you go.

Nothing to see here, folks. Just a guy who previously seems to have fantasized about sex with his adoptive mom now groping the "private parts," whatever they currently might be, of his transsexual niecenephew. Don't act all shocked.

Via @andrewbreitbart.

Corrected: I got confused by the strange familial relationship here. I think I have it all sorted out now.

Posted by: Ace at 03:48 PM | Comments (115)
Post contains 457 words, total size 3 kb.