Happy Tuesday. Some news stories to get you started:

Guy who shot four people at a New Year's house party on Sunday morning fled to Mt. Rainier national park, where he shot and killed a park ranger setting up a roadblock. Naturally, libtards are blaming legislation that allows guns in parks. Because survivalists who shoot people at house parties are well-known for obeying gun laws.

Okay, maybe just one news story to get you started...

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:52 AM | Comments (165)
Post contains 83 words, total size 1 kb.

We're Somebody: Presenting: the 2011 Fabulous 50 Blog Award Winners!

So the Doug Ross 2011 awards are out and guess what - we made it:

Meanwhile commenter Taxpayer1234 over at Legal Insurrection wrote a paper for graduate school comparing certain well-known conservative blogs and had this to say about the moron home base:

Ace of Spades’ masthead contains a quote from H.L. Mencken: “Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.” This speaks to the writing style of the blog, which is sharp-tongued, sometimes vulgar, and often humorous….

Even though Ace and his equally anonymous co-bloggers often use biting satire and vulgar language, this is balanced with insightful sociopolitical analyses that earn kudos from mainstream press, professional pundits, and politiciansÂ….

Posted by: Maetenloch at 05:55 PM | Comments (796)
Post contains 1051 words, total size 9 kb.

"Everything within my power."

Rand Paul is talking this possibility down, for what it's worth. Which is not much.

And here's Levin venting pungently at the Virginia GOP.

Posted by: Ace at 03:29 PM | Comments (301)
Post contains 82 words, total size 1 kb.

Iowahawk mentioned on Twitter that he was ready to do some headbanging at a "Steel Panther" show.

I accused him of making it up. No heavy metal band would be so stupid to call themselves Steel Panther. It's just too dumb. Even for metal.

He told me to google it, so I did. At which point I suggested there was an elaborate hoax afoot, most likely some viral marketing for an energy drink or something. No one poses like that anymore. No one was even that cheesy in the 80s.

Well, they're real. They actually do shows and stuff.

The idea of the band seems to be to take Spinal Tap and Tenacious D and turn them to 11 -- and by the way, don't even bother with cheesy sexual metaphors; just write songs explicitly about "boners" and "boobs" -- and make it real.

I'm linking some of their best (and I use this word advisedly) stuff below. It's all very NSFW. Maybe for later. more...

Posted by: Ace at 01:22 PM | Comments (389)
Post contains 552 words, total size 4 kb.

Ron Paul's greatest liability is Ron Paul, but his second greatest liability are his hippie-Nazi cultists. Not all of his supporters are hippie Nazis, but the aggressive ones are.

Since "Audit the Fed" wants to boost Ron Paul, I'm promoting his comments to the front page.

Quick, everyone! Get on this train before it fills up.

I call this prose poem "Jewess." It's about Elena Kagan.

Oh for Christ's sake.

She's a jewess.

AND a bulldyke.

She has no integrity whatsoever.

Chief Justice John Roberts: Epic. Fail.

I call this sonnet "Hebe Community."

I am merely observing the untidy little factoidal tautology which is that 90%+ of all jews support [enthusiastically] the bolshevik-nihilist assault on the foundations of Western Civilization.

They always have, and they always will.

Chicks like Pamela Geller are [statistically speaking] so rare in the hebe community that they might as well not exist.

And just in case your mother locked you in a cupboard your entire life: Every single word out of these bolshevik-nihilsts' mouths is a lie, including the words "and" and "the".

This one I call "Ode to Jewish Nature."

I'm a mathematician - I know exactly what the word "tautology" means.

From your link: "universal unconditioned truth, always valid".

As in, "It is a universal unconditioned truth, always valid, that 90%+ of all jews are bolshevik nihilists..."

Bolshevik-nihilism isn't some abstraction which exists independently from the jewish race; bolshevik-nihilism is merely a reflection of jewish nature.

There isn't a dime's worth of difference between an Elena Kagan and an Emma Goldman or a Rosa Luxemburg [or, for that matter, a modern-day bolshevik-nihilist terrorist, like Michelle LaVaughn Robinson's mentress at Sidley-Austin, Bernardine "Dohrn" Ohrnstein].

They're all manifestations ["instantiations" for you comp-sci geeks] of the same underlying legalistic darkness.

Here this Paul supporter mocks a commenter for pointing out that Bernadine Dohrn is, according to the rule that its one's mother who determines one's Jewishness, actually a gentile like himself. This Ron Paul supporter immediately compares that rules to Nazi classifications, and finds the Nazis wanting on that score.

I call this "Jews Are Just Like Nazis, Except I Like Nazis, And Hate Jews."

[a different commenter replying to him:]

Dohrn's father may have been chosen, but since he married a heathen,that makes her a heathen like you.

[The Ron Paul supporter now speaks:]

Boy, the Nazis sure were rank amateurs when it came to questions of eugenics, racial purity, and genealogical-determinism.

The extant Ron Paul Newsletters are now posted in a chronological format for your inspection.

So the question I have is this: If Ron Paul's not actually anti-semitic, and he didn't write his anti-semitic newsletters, why do so many anti-semites rally around him?

Why, it's almost as if they think he's lying when he claims to disavow the central points -- racism, anti-semitism, conspiracism -- that they so love.

I may go back into this solid citizen's previous comments, which I think were pretty much about how blacks are inferior and we need laws which reflect/announce this.

Audit the Fed, all of your repellent spam is now going to the front page, and promoted via Twitter as well. If you think your Stormfront agitation helps your antisemitic candidate, do continue.

If you wanted to keep your filth on the downlow, maybe reconsider the spam.

Quick everyone! Support Ron Paul! This is the company you will be joining.

Bonus: I skipped this anti-Paul ad from Jon Huntsman, as I didn't think I need to pile on, but every time a spammer comes in here to do his Stormfront Schtick, I'm going to post this.

Or any other anti-Paul videos.
more...

Posted by: Ace at 12:24 PM | Comments (491)
Post contains 582 words, total size 4 kb.

Now that I've got a Kindle, I'm reading again. I was wondering if anyone had any recommendations.

If anyone's new to Kindle, you have to watch it with cheapie collections of classics, like Poe, or Lovecraft, or Robert E. Howard, because some do not have functioning Tables of Contents -- you have to manually scroll through hellaciously long files, all stories in the same file without any links to their beginnings. I got burned on that on a $1.99 (incomplete) Conan collection.

Last night I downloaded the one Raymond Chandler book I hadn't read, Playback. I'm burning through it (reading is pretty fast on the Kindle), and, as everyone says, it's not just an inferior work by Chandler, but a truly weak one. Gone entirely is his amazing scene-setting and tough-guy poetry. It reads like someone attempting to mimic his style -- but also not trying very hard, because the bulk of it is just prose which, while clean and readable, is also without any color or vitality. He truly is not even trying in this one.

Plus, 60% of the way through the book, I'm really not sure what mystery I'm supposed to care about. A woman's being blackmailed for reasons unknown, and halfway through, we finally had our first body, but it just apparently walked off on its own, so I'm not sure anyone's even dead yet.

So consider this an anti-recommendation (at least so far). But if you haven't read it -- The Big Sleep is incredible. None of his later works really touch it. People claim The Long Goodbye is better but I just don't see it. It's longer, certainly, but I don't see that as a plus. The Big Sleep is short and zippy and just filled with gorgeous writing, which is a trick, because he writes in a Hemmingway-esque telegraphic style, so to convey a richness of color to a scene without resorting to flowery or emotional language is an exceptional thing.

Posted by: Ace at 11:31 AM | Comments (204)
Post contains 334 words, total size 2 kb.

As has become tradition here at the leading conservative hockey blog, we present the Winter Classic (3 eastern on NBC). This year's outdoor game is a typical good vs. evil match up held in the home of evil...Citizens Bank Ballpark in Philadelphia.

The two big hockey stories so far are the Flyers are starting their back-up goalie instead of the guy in the first year of a 9 year, $51 million deal. That'll end well.

For the Rangers the news is much better, they get their All-Star Defensemen Marc Staal back for his first game of the season after suffering a concussion last season.

Weather looks great and these two teams are 1 and 2 in the Eastern Conference*. Should be a great game.

If you're neutral, check out this story about Rangers Mike Rupp (number 71 on your score card). Pretty cool, right?

*Technically they aren't 1-2 in the conference but the winner of this game will be in 1st place (the Rangers are now).

Almost forgot...hockey teams don't really have cheerleaders but some teams have skating chicks who clean the ice up during the game. more...

Posted by: DrewM at 10:59 AM | Comments (116)
Post contains 226 words, total size 2 kb.

Tie for the lead, in pickem.

I don't like three ways myself. I prefer to disappoint women one at a time.

Winners

CountryBlumkins: 143
MuleTrain2016: 143
Aristomenes from da 54301: 143
scott: 142
Honeybadger: 139
Saintsforever: 138
Moochelle's Large Butt: 138

Windowlickers and Kyles

rd brewer: 134
DrewM: 131
Gabe Malor: 130
Russ fromWinterset: 128
Ben: 122
Andy: 118
DiT: 117

I was sooo close Andrew. So close.

Many thanks again to CDR M and Ben for keeping up with the numbers. Thanks fellers. more...

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 10:24 AM | Comments (72)
Post contains 93 words, total size 1 kb.

I'll have what she's having (vagina).

"Yeah. ThatÂ’s exactly right. We are not, we, there may be liberals on TV at MSNBC, but the network is not operating with a political objective. Whereas Fox is operating with a political objective to elect Republican candidates, and particularly, to elect Republican candidates Roger Ailes likes. I think Roger Ailes is a really good TV executive, but their operation is essentially a political operation to elect Republicans."

I believe there is a slight difference, similar to what she's talking about. Roger Ailes does (if I understand correctly) send out directives to his employees instructing them as to how to tell a story in a way that does not just echo the liberal narrative. But the reason he needs to do this is that most of Fox's employees -- from junior copywriters to editors -- are actually themselves liberal, and would be incapable of thinking of any angle besides the one they heard on NPR or CNN.

Now no one has to do that at MSNBC, of course, because its most right-wing host is... Chris Matthews, and all of the staff is either liberal or communist. All MSNBC needs to do to get a hard-left viewpoint is instruct everyone --as they've done -- that they're trying to be a liberal alternative to Fox, so let the freak flags fly.

And how they've flown.

Apart from that minor distinction, which actually just underscores how liberal the whole industry is, Rachel Maddow is a big fat idiot.

Posted by: Ace at 09:41 AM | Comments (131)
Post contains 285 words, total size 2 kb.

A bit of a paraphrase but the headline conveys the gist of the Chief Justice's remarks.

I put this on Twitter yesterday but it's still worth noting even a day late.

Roberts said he could not comment on “ongoing debates about particular issues,” but noted that one of the original canons of judicial ethics adopted in 1924 said judges “should not be swayed by partisan demands, public clamor or considerations of personal popularity or notoriety, nor be apprehensive of unjust criticism.”

“I have complete confidence in the capability of my colleagues to determine when recusal is warranted,” Roberts wrote. “They are jurists of exceptional integrity and experience whose character and fitness have been examined through a rigorous appointment and confirmation process.”

He added: “We are all deeply committed to the common interest in preserving the court’s vital role as an impartial tribunal governed by the rule of law.”

Roberts also made an interesting argument in his remarks...Supreme Court Justices shouldn't be held to the same standards of lower court judges because you can't simply get another judge to fill in.

Roberts said the public should keep in mind a key difference between lower-court judges and Supreme Court justices: While lower-court judges can be replaced when they recuse themselves from cases, that is not the case at the “court of last resort.”

“A justice accordingly cannot withdraw from a case as a matter of convenience or simply to avoid controversy,” Roberts wrote. “Rather, each justice has an obligation to the court to be sure of the need to recuse before deciding to withdraw from a case.”

I don't think that really makes any sense. No judge should recuse themselves for frivolous reasons, if something would be a conflict for a lower court judge it should be a conflict for a Justice. Either they are compromised or they aren't, convenience should have nothing to do with it.

As far as ObamaCare goes, it's moot. No Justice is going to pass up the chance to take part a case with such potential for political and historical repercussions.

No matter what the decision, which is likely to come down late spring/early summer, is going to be a Big F'n Deal (as Joey Biden would say) in the middle of the presidential campaign.

I for one, can't wait to see how Mitt "Mandates are Conservative" Romney reacts.

Posted by: DrewM at 08:19 AM | Comments (163)
Post contains 420 words, total size 3 kb.