Recently in General Musings Category

Swear to God, I'll write him in if I have to..........

Is bias in the MSM so pervasive now that they not only show bias to the D's, but they are now comfortable revealing their primary picks?

See if you can pick up the subtle bias in Hillary's favor here:

By last night, senior aides to Clinton, who represents New York, and Obama, the junior senator from Illinois, were quarreling on television, their raised voices a measure of how competitive the 2008 presidential campaign has become with more than six months until the first votes are cast.

Catch that? Clinton represents New York, while Obama is just the "junior" senator from Illinois. Why doesn't it say, "Clinton, the junior Senator from New York, and Obama, who represents Illinois......"? Only the "journalist" who wrote the article knows for sure.

The Hotline blog highlights this exhange between Barack Obama and George Stephanopolous:

STEPHANOPOULOS: You've also said that with Social Security, everything should be on the table.

OBAMA: Yes.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Raising the retirement age?

OBAMA: Everything should be on the table.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Raising payroll taxes?

OBAMA: Everything should be on the table. I think we should
approach it the same way Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan did back in
1983. They came together. I don't want to lay out my preferences
beforehand, but what I know is that Social Security is solvable. It
is not as difficult a problem as we're going to have with Medicaid and
Medicare.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Partial privatization?

OBAMA: Privatization is not something that I would consider....

So everything should be on the table except the stuff that I don't want to be on the table. Idiot. Why is this lightweight even being humored with support in the polls?

Can we dispense with the "Charlie-Weis-is-a-genius" talk? Forever?

Thanks so much.

Well, this being January 2 and all, let's expand that to say, best headline of this college football season:

Wolverines go down with a whimper Rout by USC exposes Michigan as pretenders in national title picture

Amen, brother, amen!

Carr was asked whether USC could beat Ohio State. Who better to ask than the coach who had lost his last two games to them both?

Carr, though, wasn’t biting.

“I’ll let you be the judge,” he said.

That's just Carr's way of saying, "There's no real way to tell, because we got way lucky to be able to score as many points as we did against Ohio State. If we had played them again, the result would probably have been the same as the USC game."

How many times does OSU have to beat them for people to get that they can't beat us?

Why would you want a rematch of a game that was just played? An OSU/UM rematch is completely different than, say, an OSU/UT rematch, or God forbid, a UM/Notre Dame rematch. Each team is a different team than they were in September. Thus a rematch would be an interesting test of each team's improvements and exposed deficiencies that perhaps weren't obvious in September.

On the other hand, OSU just beat Michigan. We're both the teams we'll be on January 8. So what's the point?

And I am tired of the argument that Michigan deserves more respect than Florida because they came within 3 points of the #1 team on their home field? Don't kid yourself. If we had played Michigan again, they wouldn't have come within two touchdowns. Face it: We handed them 10 points on a silver platter. Our first turnover game them the ball on what? Our 25? Anyone recall how many yards they gained on that series? Anyone familiar with the expression "3 yards and a cloud of dust?" Well, there was no dust. Just the 3 yards. The best the "second best team in the country" could muster on that drive starting at our 25 was three points, or put another way, 1 point per yard. They scored again when we coughed the ball up on the 9 yard line. So for those 10 points, they had to gain a whole 12 yards. If we play them again, they don't score those 10 points. Suddenly, their 3 point loss is a 13 point loss in a gaime they were never really in. I think it was Pat Forde on ESPN.com that pointed out that for all Michigan's heroics, they only had one opportunity to take the lead in the second half, (it was 31-35) and they went three and out. We promptly drove the length of the field for a touchdown. Game over.

Bring on the Gators. Michigan showed a complete inability to stop us. No doubt the Gators effort will be just as futile. Then can everyone shut up about the SEC being the best conference in the nation?

I frequent an online forum that has a popular thread entitled "unique baby names." You'd have to read it to believe it. Some people really are idiots. This may be the quote to end all quotes from the thread:

My daughter's name is Lochlyn Blue. We too wanted something unique, but not too odd. I don't imagine we'll encounter many other Lochlyn's throughout her life!

Unique, but not too odd? And you think "Lochlyn Blue" hit the mark? For the love of God, people! Think before you act. And if you act before you think, at least think before you open your mouth about it.

The latest argument against the President that's currently in vogue is the idea that we didn't do enough in Afganistan. That Iraq distracted from finishing the job in Afganistan. That because we changed our focus to Iraq so quickly, that the Taliban has been able to regain a foothold in Afganistan.

So tell me this. When was the last time a significant Al Queda operative was captured or killed in Afganistan?

Many people think that Osama is dead; those who think he's still alive say he's a lot of places, but not Afganistan. We bagged some of his cohorts in Pakistan, and bodybagged more than a few in Iraq. But we haven't found any in Afganistan. Why is that? Perhaps because we satisfied our objective in Afganistan, and it is now only marginally important to the war on terror?

We went to Afganistan because it was a haven for terrorists and OSB. Now it no longer is. Sounds like Mission Accomplished to me.

Is that even possible? An Al Queda operative was in Iraq? But Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terror does it? Does it?

[Update: Best of the Web agrees]

Something that really bugs me are sanctimonious prigs who cover their cars with left-wing bumperstickers. I saw one today that pious asked, "Who would Jesus bomb?"

What a stupid friggin' question. Why on earth would Jesus use a bomb when he could just wipe out every living creature on the planet (except, of course, anyone he thought was righteous enough) with a flood?

Morale of the story: Don't get all self-righteous and start throwing around stupid cliches unless you really consider what you are saying.

And while I'm on the subject, you might do will to consider what the Islamofacists believe their Allah requires of them. In their view, the question "Who would Allah bomb?" is easily answered: everyone and anyone, as long as it's in Allah's name.

In light of enemy's mindset in this regard, Jesus just might do well to start packing some heat, if he cares for his flock.

Crystal Morning: September 11, 2001

Ever notice that when you see an MSNBC.com headline like:

"Croc Hunter's" death caught on tape | Video

The video link is never what you had hoped it would be? Or is that just me?

This is a pretty cool website that tells you how common your last name is. Type it in and the website will give you its rank in the top 55,000 surnames in the United States.

My wife claims that she guessed the top four in only four tries. How many guesses will it take you?

How common is your surname?

Sometimes, the contraints of headline writing, brevity being the most important, don't allow for an adequate description of the story below. Take this one, for instance:

Pregnant woman crashes car, gives birth alone

Wow! That's amazing, you say. That must be an amazing story, you think. But to really convey how amazing this story is, the headline should have been

Pregnant woman crashes car, gives birth alone in a partially submerged car, despite broken leg.

Now THAT's a story!

British authorities said Thursday they thwarted a terrorist plot to simultaneously blow up 10 aircraft heading to the U.S. using explosives smuggled in hand luggage, averting what police described as “mass murder on an unimaginable scale.”

"Unimaginable"? Sadly, no. If 9/11 taught us anything, it's that nothing is "unimaginable."

This article about Maurice Clarett's unbelievable new arrest provides (unwittingly, I think) an incredibly valuable insight into how Clarett became Clarett.

Let's set the scene.

Clarett is arrested after an L.A.-style police pursuit (trailing helicopter and all!) on the highways and byways of benign Columbus. The police had to use a spike strip to get him to stop his car. When he finally did, he refused to leave his vehicle, he had to be forcibly removed and subdued with mace (the stun-gun didn't work because of the protective vest Clarett was wearing).

That's right - Clarett was wearing a bulletproof vest. He had a loaded 9mm under his legs on the driver's seat. A loaded "AK-47 type assault rifle" was at his side on the passenger seat. Two other guns were found in a backpack on the passerger side floor.

That's the backdrop. Here's the insight:

Clarett was planning on playing football in an indoor football league for a team called the Mahoning Valley Hitmen. Oh my God, the irony is so rich I feel like I need angioplasty. But that's not even the insightful part. Upon learning the news, here's what his erstwhile coach said:

The arrest will not affect Clarett’s status with the team, Terry said.

“We gave him a chance and now we’ll wait to see what happens,” he said. “I’ve seen far worse situations than this.”

Wha-Wha-WHAT? He's seen far worse situations? Like what, if I may be so bold? Clarett was wearing a bulletproof vest, sitting on a 9mm and had an assault rifle within reach. It's not too ambitious a conjecture to suggest that quite possibly, the Columbus Police prevented a massacre of some sort.

That blase statement about Clarett's arrest from his coach provides a telling insight into the mentality of the people that he grew up with, learned from, returned to. It is sad and pathetic. With that kind of thinking influencing his development, it is not suprising that, according to MSNBC's Mike Celizic, he is one of sports's greatest flameouts.

One last thing: You think the name of his erstwhile team is ironic? Check out its logo.

Here are a couple of things I’ve learned recently.

1. Kids won’t eat anything, just because the food is endorsed by a famous celebrity.

2. Not even Hello Kitty.

3. Not even Hello Kitty Pop Tarts.

5. Meow-Berry is not an appealing flavor for kids.

4. At least one of my children won't eat anything with jimmies on it.

5. Not even Hello Kitty jimmies.

Who knew?

Well, obviously, Castro is dead. There's no other way to explain this bizarre turn of events, is there? By using the ricidulous claim that the United States is about to attack, Cuba can use the impending invasion as cover to mobilize the military throughout the country -- so that they can put down any resistance or any too joyous celebration when the truth about their dear leader comes out.

Love James Lileks. Read him every day. Agree with him on most stuff, as it turns out (except for his love of techno, of course). Anywho. He's a Mac guy. And like every Mac guy (sorry - Mac person), he's a bit, um, well, pious about Mac v. PC. Nobody's perfect (See, e.g., techo, supra). Anyway, his little rant today was a classic.

Here it is in a nutshell.

I installed the Gigawhatsis KT-18W5B3 software on the PC side of Gnat’s Macbook. This enabled me to ship my custom ringtones and wallpapers to the new phones.

Set up was amusing, as ever: Windows is preparing to install a wizard that will prepare the installation of the installation wizard; please wait.

The installation process included a screen with a warning: Warning! You may see this warning. Your computer may say that your computer is incompatible. Please disregard this message. You had to click a box that said, in effect, “I subscribe to this jury-rigged heap of code with the usual weary indifference,” after which you were permitted to continue.

When the Wizard was done I was presented with the Panasonic program for transferring files to the new phone. Spiffy! I plugged in the phone. Windows has detected something new; would you like to install the hardware for it? Well, I just did, didn’t I? Dismiss.

GGGGAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!! NNNNNNNNNNNNOoooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!

This is precisely the point where every PC user lost interest in this particular rant. Who here doesn't know how this ends at this point? Show of hands? Because every PC user knows: Do not defy Windows. if it asks you to install something, you install it. Already installed it? Install it again! Period.

Sounds inefficient, I know. But its saves you from calling tech support for a phone.

I'm just sayin'.

P.S. I'd bet my mortgage that the directions instruct the user the connect the phone to the computer BEFORE installing the software. Again, I'm just sayin'.

Here's a classic bit of thinking from Chuck Schumer.

New York's senior senator said he was weighing Mr. Bolton's backing of Israel against his unwillingness to work with other countries at the United Nations. "There's a good part of Bolton. He's been a staunch and very good defender of Israel," Mr. Schumer said on CNN's "Late Edition." "There's a bad part of Bolton. He seems to have a ‘go it alone' attitude at a time when we need the nations of the world on our side. We've seen that in Iran and North Korea."

Got that? Schumer doesn't like it when Bolton "goes it alone" when we need other nations on our side. But Bolton's "staunch defense" of Israel is great. WTF?

We've been busting our ass (successfully) to get the rest of the Security Council on board with hemming in Iran. Ditto with North Korea. In fact, about the only subject upon which we are actually "going it alone" is.......wait for it.......

ISRAEL! We are Israel's only "staunch and very good defender." On every subject and practically every vote, we are "going it alone" on Israel.

Do politicians ever think about what they are going to say before they open their mouths?

From the MSNBC.com "Sports" section:

Updated: 12 minutes ago SUMMIT, N.J. - Michelle Wie holed her chip from off the green on the 18th hole to shoot a 2-under 68 in the first round of her U.S. Open qualifier Monday, followed by a swelling gallery as she began her attempt to become the first woman to qualify for the U.S. Open.

The 16-year-old star from Hawaii clearly was the headline attraction of this 36-hole sectional qualifier at Canoe Brook Country Club.

Wearing a coral sweater and olive capri pants, Wie was competing against 152 men for 18 spots available in the Open at Winged Foot in Mamaroneck, N.Y., in two weeks. She is tied for 11th, meaning she would currently qualify for a playoff to determine who qualifies.

. . .

Wie was greeted with polite applause by a couple of hundred spectators as she arrived at the 501-yard, par-4 No. 1 hole on the South Course. She pulled her drive left into the wet rough, and the crowd went silent.

Wie chipped 80 yards short of the green and hit her third about 12 feet right of the hole. Her par-saver was right in the middle of the cup.

She removed her swe[a]ter and unveiled a lime-striped golf shirt for the par-4, 394-yard second hole and drove down the middle. Her second hit was from 9 feet, but she pushed her putt right. It never touched the cup, drawing groans from the crowd....

What the hell is going on here? Is this a sports page article about a golfer trying to qualify for the U.S. Open or a society page article about her cotillion?

When was the last time you read anything about what John Daly was wearing? David Toms? Davis Love III? Phil Mickelson? [Jesper Parnevik is an obvious exception.]

Normally you don't see sexism so blatently revealed in the MSM any more, but it sure is shamefully on display here.

Africanized Killer Bees. Remember this panic? Swarms coming up from Mexico and wiping us out by the thousands? Remember?

That's what I thought.

Stand down, people.

From MSNBC.com's "First Read" column....

As we mentioned earlier today, one of the key primaries to watch in Ohio today is the Democratic contest for the congressional seat being abandoned by Rep. Ted Strickland (D), who's running for governor. In this race, establishment favorite Charlie Wilson (D) is trying to win the nomination as a write-in candidate because he amazingly failed to secure the 50 valid signatures needed to get on the ballot. And experts say that if Wilson isn't able to defeat his lesser-known Democratic opponents, that gives the GOP an almost sure shot of winning this seat -- making the Dems' chances of winning back the House even more difficult.

But Democrats are working hard to ensure that Wilson wins the primary. And even organized labor has gotten into the act.

I LOVE that. "Even organized labor has gotten into the act." WOW! It has? Even the AFL-CIO is working hand-in-hand with the Democratic Party to affect the outcome of an election? Will wonders never cease! I just can't belive that even the union would help out with something like this. Just amazing!

Great piece explaining in detail why we cannot just shrug our shoulders at the fact that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.

Back when nuclear weapons were an elite club of five relatively sane world powers, your average Western progressive was convinced the planet was about to go ka-boom any minute. The mushroom cloud was one of the most familiar images in the culture, a recurring feature of novels and album covers and movie posters. There were bestselling dystopian picture books for children, in which the handful of survivors spent their last days walking in a nuclear winter wonderland. Now a state openly committed to the annihilation of a neighboring nation has nukes, and we shrug: Can’t be helped. Just the way things are. One hears sophisticated arguments that perhaps the best thing is to let everyone get ’em, and then no one will use them. And if Iran’s head of state happens to threaten to wipe Israel off the map, we should understand that this is a rhetorical stylistic device that’s part of the Persian oral narrative tradition, and it would be a grossly Eurocentric misinterpretation to take it literally.

It seems like a no brainer that we should be taking this seriously and be seriously worried about the consequences of a nuclear-armed Iran. Is it just me, or does the West seem not that alarmed? It should. And we should act now.

The cost of de-nuking Iran will be high now but significantly higher with every year it’s postponed. The lesson of the Danish cartoons is the clearest reminder that what is at stake here is the credibility of our civilization. Whether or not we end the nuclearization of the Islamic Republic will be an act that defines our time.

Amen. So let's get on with it.

..... for listening.

Lisa leaves ‘Idol,’ and viewers mostly agree

Um, isn't that the whole premise of the show?

Isn't that sort of like, "Stacy fired on The Apprentice: Trump agrees" ?

Very, very wrong.

A runaway train killed seven people and injured at least 11, severing some of their limbs, during the filming of a TV show in Uruguay, police said.

Keep reading to the end, so you don't miss the part about the 3,000 schoolchildren that were watching.

Am I so old that this is what the rock stars of my era look like now?

Oh, and Eddie? Phil Specter called and he wants his hair back.

It just occured to me that this year's Oscar winners featured not one, but TWO Facts of Life alums.

Seriously. What are the chances of that? Hell, if you had told me that after this year's EMMY'S that two winners were Facts of Life alums, I would not have believed it.

But Oscars? Good Lord!

Best Picture, Best Original Screenplay; Crash : Paul Haggis

Best Supporting Actor; Syriana: George Clooney

As a matter of fact, I challenge anyone out there to show me a year in which two Facts of Life alums won an Emmy in the same year. I'm thinkin' it can't be done.

But Oscars? 2006, chump.

This article is typical of the media's deceit when it comes to reporting the facts of the Hurricane Katrina disaster. Headlined White House, Dems wrangle on Katrina video; Congressional leaders 'falsely attacking' Bush, president's spokesmen say the article goes on to restate all of the Democrats' falsehoods, while reporting that the White House issued a point-by-point memo refuting the Democrats.

Got that? The article repeats the falsehoods, but doesn't report the White House's counterpoints, just that it has some.

The most egregious of the outright lies in the article is this one:

But Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said the video shows that the administration failed to prepare adequately for the possible breach of the levees protecting New Orleans.

“This administration was told what Louisiana already knew: that our federally constructed levees could certainly fail,” she said. “But these concerns, and others made by disaster relief experts, fell on deaf ears.”

So what do you think the very next paragraph in the article is? What do you think is the next paragraph after this outrageous and overblown rhetoric from Landrieu? The White House's counterpoint? Or perhaps a completely unrelated point that makes the White House look squirrely and defensive? Hmmmm.......

Immediately after the release of the video on Wednesday, the White House and Homeland Security Department urged the public not to read too much into the footage.

When in fact, the White House's counterpoint relies directly on the footage, which isn't the least bit ambiguous on this very point. It isn't just a rhetorical counter based on spin, but instead relies on the videotape itself, which completely refutes Landrieu and proves her to be a liar. To wit:

In August 29th Videoconference, Gov. Kathleen Blanco Told The White House "We Have Not Breached The Levee At This Point In Time." GOV. BLANCO: "We keep getting reports in some places that maybe water is coming over the levees. ... I think we have not breached the levee. We have not breached the levee at this point in time. That could change, but in some places we have floodwaters coming in New Orleans East and the line at St. Bernard Parish where we have waters that are 8- to 10-feet deep, and we have people swimming in there, that's got a considerable amount of water."

In fact, as has been reported elsewhere, the word "breach" appears nowhere else in the transcript of the videotape. Not even the spectre of a breach is even suggested, other than the Louisiana Governor's assurances that the levees had not been breached.

Hack Job is right.

This article is typical of the media's deceit when it comes to reporting the facts of the Hurricane Katrina disaster. Headlined White House, Dems wrangle on Katrina video; Congressional leaders 'falsely attacking' Bush, president's spokesmen say the article goes on to restate all of the Democrats' falsehoods, while reporting that the White House issued a point-by-point memo refuting the Democrats.

Got that? The article repeats the falsehoods, but doesn't report the White House's counterpoints, just that it has some.

The most egregious of the outright lies in the article is this one:

But Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said the video shows that the administration failed to prepare adequately for the possible breach of the levees protecting New Orleans.

“This administration was told what Louisiana already knew: that our federally constructed levees could certainly fail,” she said. “But these concerns, and others made by disaster relief experts, fell on deaf ears.”

So what do you think the very next paragraph in the article is? What do you think is the next paragraph after this outrageous and overblown rhetoric from Landrieu? The White House's counterpoint? Or perhaps a completely unrelated point that makes the White House look squirrely and defensive? Hmmmm.......

Immediately after the release of the video on Wednesday, the White House and Homeland Security Department urged the public not to read too much into the footage.

When in fact, the White House's counterpoint relies directly on the footage, which isn't the least bit ambiguous on this very point. It isn't just a rhetorical counter based on spin, but instead relies on the videotape itself, which completely refutes Landrieu and proves her to be a liar. To wit:

In August 29th Videoconference, Gov. Kathleen Blanco Told The White House "We Have Not Breached The Levee At This Point In Time." GOV. BLANCO: "We keep getting reports in some places that maybe water is coming over the levees. ... I think we have not breached the levee. We have not breached the levee at this point in time. That could change, but in some places we have floodwaters coming in New Orleans East and the line at St. Bernard Parish where we have waters that are 8- to 10-feet deep, and we have people swimming in there, that's got a considerable amount of water."

In fact, as has been reported elsewhere, the word "breach" appears nowhere else in the transcript of the videotape. Not even the spectre of a breach is even suggested, other than the Louisiana Governor's assurances that the levees had not been breached.

Hack Job is right.

And you should too. Part political, part philisophical, part pop culture, part intellectual.

Where else on the web will you find posts like these. The first is a response by Derb to a post concerning a scientific article about how dogs track down balls that they chase

RE: DOG CALCULUS [John Derbyshire]

Nothing much new, Jonah. All my adult life, every time I've seen a dog jump to catch a frisbee, I (in common with, I suppose, every other math geek) have been vexed by the thought: How on earth did he solve all those simultaneous differential equations so fast?

Posted at 12:15 PM

RE: DOG CALCULUS [John Derbyshire]

We have readers in EVERY line of work:

"Mr. Derbyshire---In The Corner, you asked 'How on earth did he solve all those simultaneous differential equations so fast?' He doesn't. He does the same thing that we in the Ballistic Missile Defense world do – he approximates. In engineering, unlike math, there is such a thing as 'close enough.'

"Shooting down a missile and catching a Frisbee in the air are remarkably similar tasks. The size of the opening of the dog's mouth relative to the Frisbee's edge profile, and the ability of his head to maneuver when he gets close to his target means that he only has to jump in the general vicinity of the Frisbee to maneuver his head into the path of the disk and snatch it from the sky. In BMD, we estimate the path of the ballistic missile we wish to intercept and shoot the missile to a point close enough to the trajectory of the target so that the maneuvering seeker head of the interceptor can guide itself into the target. We also back that up by supporting a multiple shot model to reduce the probability of a miss, sort of like sending two dogs at different intervals to catch the Frisbee.

"Of course, dogs have been catching Frisbees for decades, while we've only really just figured out how to shoot down ballistic missiles in the last few years."

[Derb] Thanks for what you guys do. You hear a lot that rogue states, if they nuke us, will do so via truck or suitcase bombs. Possibly so. BM technology, however, like any other, gets cheaper and more available all the time. We need defending against it, and that need will only increase.

Posted at 03:21 PM

Where else are you going to get stuff like that? Where?

How can you not love Sasha Cohen? I tried hard not too. I thought she was cocky and aloof and a bit full of herself (and redundant, I guess). But I was wrong. Really, how can you not love his girl?

Howard Kurtz graciously encapsulated the media's idiocy on the Cheney incident into one convenient article. Thanks, Howie! Let the pithy commentary begin!

Other than the fact that a sitting vice president hasn't shot anyone since Aaron Burr dispatched Alexander Hamilton, why is Dick Cheney the non-sharpshooter getting so much coverage? Okay, other than the fact that the comics haven't had so much fun since President Bush choked on a pretzel. (Letterman: "We can't get Bin Laden, but we nailed a 78-year-old attorney.") Okay, other than the fact that the VP saw no reason to tell the press and immediately went into the metaphorical equivalent of a secret undisclosed location?

And other than the this-isn't-so-funny-after-all news yesterday that the birdshot had caused Harry Whittington to suffer a minor heart attack?

The reason this is such a crossover hit, I believe, is that it encapsulates everything we know, or think we know, about Vice President Cheney. So secretive that he even waited to tell Bush. So taciturn that he feels no need for a public apology. So insulated that he defers a police interview until the following morning. So defensive that he has not so much as acknowledged a mistake.

At 2:47 p.m. yesterday, Cheney's office finally put out a statement, saying he had called Whittington and wished him well--but still not even a hint of public regret.

Part of the dynamic here is that the birdshot brouhaha gives everyone a chance to play their assigned roles. The White House press corps is outraged at the 21-hour delay in informing the world.

Liberals say this is typical of the way the administration botched the war, and they wonder why journalists didn't get this exercised about being misled on WMD.

Conservatives say this is nothing but a common hunting accident, and they blame journalists for blowing it way out of proportion.

I'm happy to report that Bill O'Reilly reads Media Notes online (or at least someone on his staff does). He responded last night to my observation that he led with Al Gore saying in Saudi Arabia that the U.S. has mistreated Arabs (no coverage in major newspapers, he's right about that) and inexplicably reduced the Cheney accident to the day's most ridiculous item. The veep's failure to come clean, says Mr. O, is because of his "well-known press phobia. . . . The vice president's hunting accident affects no one, means nothing, and the vice president's refusal to brief the press was predictable." O'Reilly did allow that "Dick Cheney's secret style hurts him." I would argue that Cheney's actions, while physically hurting no one other than poor Mr. Whittington, hurt the reputation of the vice president and the administration.

By the way, Scott McClellan exacerbated matters at yesterday's briefing by insisting he was "moving on" (standard practice in every administration under fire) but refusing to disclose what he knew, which was that Whittington had suffered a heart attack . I don't get it.

Okay, the White House whispers have begun, as we see in this New York Times piece on "the latest example of the degree to which Mr. Cheney's habit of living in his own world in the Bush White House -- surrounded by his own staff, relying on his own instincts, saying as little as possible -- had backfired since the accident in Texas on Saturday. Mr. Cheney's staff members have kept their comments to chronological details and to repeating the vice president's written statements.

Philadelphia Inquirer : "Dick Cheney's weekend 'peppering' of a 78-year-old hunting pal on a private ranch owned by wealthy Republican donors is threatening to become a metaphor for his tenure as America's number two. "It's not always easy for voters to track all the details of Cheney's documented preference for secrecy: his secret war planning (which circumvented the State Department and the intelligence community);..."

...his secret energy-policy meetings with Enron and other major GOP contributors (he was sued by public-interest groups, in a case that went all the way to the Supreme Court);...

...his ties to I. Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, the ex-aide (now indicted)...

who may have helped to discredit a whistle-blower;...

...his insistence that secret warrantless surveillance of Americans is consistent with the U.S. Constitution."

But "Here we have a case where Cheney chose (by his own inaction) not to inform his fellow Americans that the man who is one heartbeat away from the presidency had pulled a trigger and put somebody in intensive care."

The New York Post headline: "DICK DUCKS."

Cheney's boss also had a brush with a hunting mistake, as Slate's John Dickerson recalls: "Perhaps the even more apt analogy was Bush's own hunting incident in 1994. When the gubernatorial candidate accidentally killed a protected killdeer during a dove shoot, he wrote that he reacted this way: 'Karen [Hughes] and I looked at each other. What now? "We confess," we both said, almost simultaneously. Bush then called every reporter who had been on his hunting trip. He then announced it at a press conference. The lesson of the shooting, Bush wrote in his biography, is that 'people watch the way you handle things; they get a feeling they like and trust you, or they don't.' "Unfortunately for the president, Bush wasn't able to give his vice president this advice. (He learned about the shooting from Karl Rove, who talked to the ranch owner.) Cheney played his own press secretary after this incident, agreeing with the owner of the ranch that there would be no official notice and that she could release the information herself. Cheney's allies (and those are different than Bush allies in this case) argue that Cheney cared more about his hurt friend and his host than he did about informing the Beltway press. Maybe for the first hour or two, but to wait so long only points out what we always have known about the vice president: He doesn't give a damn about the public or press' right to know.

The Huffington Post devotes much of its home page to the topic, with Arianna saying of McClellan and the media: "Talk about your dysfunctional relationship. The air of a love affair gone sour hung over the gaggle like a cheap perfume. It was actually very appropriate viewing for a Valentine's Day morning. The emotional intensity reminded me of many failed relationships I've witnessed -- and a few I've been part of. . . .

"Channeling Dr. Phil for a moment, I couldn't help but wonder: is the press really this worked up about being kept out of the shooting loop for 18 hours or are there bigger issues at play? What the relationship gurus call 'baggage'. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this isn't a big story -- especially now that Cheney's victim has suffered a heart attack. But it was only a few days ago we learned that Cheney might have authorized Scooter Libby to leak classified information to reporters -- and that story didn't generate a tiny fraction of the coverage."

Lawrence O'Donnell gets a little tipsy in writing: "How do we know there was no alcohol? Cheney refused to talk to local authorities until the next day. No point in giving him a breathalyzer then. Every lawyer I've talked to assumes Cheney was too drunk to talk to the cops after the shooting."

National Review posts a transcript of ex-senator Alan Simpson dissecting Cheney for Chris Matthews: "MATTHEWS: Doesn't he have a special responsibility as someone in line to be President and Vice President of the United States to let people know that something this serious happened this Saturday? "SIMPSON: Nothing happened to the Vice President, so what did the people of America need to know? Nothing happened to the Vice President, nothing. "MATTHEWS: But he was the shooter in an accident that shot a guy. "SIMPSON: That's right. "MATTHEWS: You don't think that's newsworthy? "SIMPSON: All I know, Chris, is after a life in Washington, Dick Cheney, and I'm not paranoid, is not popular with the media, they don't like him because he's aloof and he doesn't answer their questions and sometimes he tells them to stuff it, so any time Dick Cheney makes a fluff, it's going to be the news of the day. I have been called by 20 different news agency today as if they had bombed Iraq again. I mean, this is nuts, absolutely nuts."

Harry Shearer sees a case of delayed outrage by the press: "Of course, the Bush administration's media strategy--keep it secret, deny it if it leaks, fire the dissenters--has been practiced far more than thrice. But the first two major versions of the strategy--the runup to the Iraq War and the aftermath of Katrina--occurred as tragedy. Now the gods reward us with the Dick Cheney shooting story, in which the media strategy resurfaces as farce. "And, predictably, the White House press corps, which sat still and silent for the tragic versions, is up in arms over the farcical one."

In the Charlotte Observer, North Carolina professor and hunter Scott Denham fears for the image of his pastime: "It is unfortunate that upland bird hunting has gotten this kind of bad press because of irresponsible hunting practices by a prominent member of the upper class. Hunting preserves open spaces for use by all; hunting connects younger generations with the land and with traditions; hunting is about conservation. As a hunter and conservationist, I feel misrepresented by Cheney and his ilk. They portray hunting as a sport for the rich, carried out on vast private lands, where pulling the trigger takes priority over everything else."

Ed Morrissey rips The Post's Dana Milbank for appearing with MSNBC's Keith Olbermann in an orange cap and orange safety vest: "No, this isn't a tryout for America's Worst-Dressed Nerds; it's Milbank trying to be funny and only succeeding at being funny-looking. Since when do serious journalists pull stunts like this? Heck, most bloggers I know wouldn't be dumb enough to dress like this on national TV even as a joke, not if they wanted to maintain any credibility. "Memo to the Exempt Media: it was an accident. Report it and get over it, and then shut . . . up so that we can listen to the real comedians make fun of Dick Cheney. Anyone want to guess how much higher the ratings for Jay and Dave will be tonight?" I missed the memo. When did we become the exempt media, and what are we exempt from ? The normal rules of human discourse?

Betsy's Page wonders if this is just Beltway myopia: "I suspect that the great majority of the American people realize that this was an accident. They know that Cheney must feel awful about injuring his friend. But they also know that the American people didn't suffer by having to wait a day over the weekend to learn the story. I wonder how many of the Washington press corps have ever been hunting in their lives." Actually, Cheney probably does feel awful about injuring his friend. But how would we know that since he hasn't uttered a syllable in public?

Sorry, but all that pith wore me out. I don't feel like including all the links in Kurtz's article. Please go there for links to his sources of this oh so rich material.

Hat Tip: The Professor.

This seems to be a classic Rove maneuver: stay silent for as long as it takes the democrats and their liberal media lapdogs to work themselves into a maniacal lather, wait for the crescendo, then have Cheney deliver a public beat-down.

Mark my words: He'll come out and personalize it, which is to say, explain that this was a personal tragedy between two men - a horrible accident that everyone truly regrets. Then, without even a hint of defensiveness, he will rip into the critics on the left and in the media who would rather politicize this than recognize it for the deeply personal and private tragedy that it is.

Cheney will come out of this looking more human than ever, and will indeed get a bump in the polls.

You heard it here first.

This is very cool. It is a free real estate "appraisal" of your house. Though it doesn't use the MLS service used by real estate professionals, it culls information from a variety of sources, including tax records, recent sales of comparable homes, etc. to come up with an estimate of your home's value.

Check it out: www.zillow.com

As the Super Bowl approaches, the WSJ column "The Daily Fix" has devoted today's column to their favorite Steeler-themed articles. Because the column is for subscribers only, I have taken out chunks that link to my favorite of their favorite articles. Enjoy.

Since 1969, the Steelers have had exactly two coaches: Mr. Noll and Mr. Cowher. That's typical of the Rooneys' quiet approach to their franchise, as Ira Miller notes in the San Francisco Chronicle:

"There are 456 pages in the Steelers' media guide," he writes. "Conspicuously absent from those pages is a biography or photo of the team's owner. Most owners can't wait to lead the parade, to make the most noise, to become the most prominent. Not Rooney.

The feel-good story will be Mr. Bettis. The running back, a 13-year veteran, will be looking to check out on top of the world -- a scenario that couldn't have seemed less likely as the 2004 AFC Championship Game ticked away to nothing with Pittsburgh beaten badly at home by the New England Patriots and Mr. Roethlisberger and Hines Ward in tears on the sidelines.

"[T]hrough the tears and his mumbled apologies, Roethlisberger made an emotional, completely irrational promise," writes Greg Garber on ESPN.com. " 'I said, "Jerome, if you give me one more year, I promise" -- I can't believe I said it, because I don't like making promises I can't keep, and I didn't know if I could keep it -- "that I'll get you to a Super Bowl in your hometown." ' "

Looking down from the stands will be Mr. Bettis's parents, Johnnie and Gladys. That's nothing new, as the Detroit Free Press's Mitch Albom writes: "Through high school, through college, through 13 years of his NFL career, Jerome Bettis' parents have not missed a game he has played on American soil."

And, finally, Pittsburgh radio personality Scott Paulsen has written a wonderful piece on how the end of an era created something lasting.

All around the NFL, the word is out that the Pittsburgh Steeler fans “travel well”, meaning they will fly or drive from Pittsburgh to anywhere the Steelers play, just to see their team. The one aspect about that situation the rest of the NFL fails to grasp is that, sometimes, the Steeler Nation does not have to travel. Sometimes, we're already there.

Yes, the short sighted steel mills screwed our families over.

But they did, in a completely unintended way, create something new and perhaps more powerful than an industry.

They helped created a nation.

A Steeler Nation.

Scientists spot a new Earthlike planet

Let's see:

It's 5 1/2 time larger than Earth

It is 2 1/2 times farther from its sun than Earth is

Its sun is 1/5 the size of our sun, and 50 times dimmer

Its surface temperature is -394 degrees

It sports a "rocky" surface

Gee - it's just eerie how "earthlike" it is.

Her description of Joe Biden:

The great thing about Joe Biden during the Alito hearings, the reason he is, to me, actually endearing, is that as he speaks, as he goes on and on and spins his long statements, hypotheticals, and free associations--as he demonstrates yet again, as he did in the Roberts hearings and even the Thomas hearings, that he is incapable of staying on the river of a thought, and is constantly lured down tributaries from which he can never quite work his way back--you can see him batting the little paddles of his mind against the weeds, trying desperately to return to the river but not remembering where it is, or where it was going.

Eloquent, biting, and most important - melodious. It just rolls off the tongue with such amazing ease. My God, what I would give to be able to construct a sentence like that. (What? You didn't notice? It's one sentence!)

1995-2006

Check out this tidbit from the L.A. Times:

Publishing: Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and children's publisher Scholastic Corp. will issue an illustrated book about a typical day in his life as told by Splash, his Portuguese water dog. Kennedy's proceeds from the 56-page book, due out in May, will go to charity.

Seriously? Senator Kennedy named his dog "Splash"?? Is "Splash" really the best name for Sen. Kennedy's dog?

Why not, instead of "splash," which is the sound that the car carrying Mary Jo Kopechne made when it hit the water, how about "Glub, glub" the sound it made as it sunk to the bottom of the river. Or how about "Crash" the sound the car made as it jumped the curb. Any other suggestions?

If there's anything I love more than beating the U of M, it's beating Notre Dame. And last night, the Buckeyes didn't just beat them, they punished them. Punished them for thinking they are back. As Mike Celizic says, not quite.

Here's another great article from CNNSI.com. One of his most interesting observations:

Every game story will note that the Buckeyes won with big-play TDs: Ginn's 56-yard reception and his 68-yard reverse, a play that left so many Irish defenders sprawled on the turf that I thought I was watching the climactic scene from Horse Feathers; Santonio Holmes' 85-yard reception; and, lastly, Antonio Pittman's 60-yard off-tackle run. What every story may not mention is that all four of those scores occurred on the very next play after the Buckeyes had converted a third-down try.

Pat Forde at ESPN.com has a great article about Smith and how OSU is aiming for a national title next year. And where will it be played?

After shredding the Fighting Irish, Smith was asked whether he knew where the '07 national title game will be played.

"The national championship game is here next year," Smith said, on cue, then smiled. "We like that."

The Buckeyes have to love that. They own the Valley of the Sun in a way the Cardinals and Sun Devils can only dream of.

I love that line.

Charlie "The Genius" Weis takes some pretty serious criticism in the Chicago Tribune.

A coach's preparation is a key to any big game, so if Weis is to be given credit for the Irish's many successes, he also must be accountable for their glaring gaps and lapses this time.

The New York Times also has lots of good things to say about Ohio State.

Perhaps they shouldn't call it the Fiesta Bowl anymore. As the Wall Street Journal suggests, "Maybe they should just call it the Buckeye Bowl."

And finally, how could I comment on the game without mentioning the unseemly Brady-Laura-A.J. triangle? From the Dayton Daily News:

"Even before Thanksgiving, when both teams had two or three games left, I said, 'Have you heard we could possibly play you guys if we win out and you win out?' " Robin Quinn recalled. "And he said, 'Yeah, there's a rumor of that.' I said, 'That would be awkward because you would be sacking my son.' And he said, 'Yes, I would.'

I admit it. It was me.

I am a broken man.

Of course, Jonah is still wrong. (Here's his original post, to which I had responded.) I mean how can you argue with this:

Kiss does begin with the letter K, but "Kay" is the name of the jewellers. Why else point this out? Why not offer the tagline "Every Hug Begins with H" or "Love begins El"? Or, for that matter, "We have armadillos in our trousers."?

The incoherence of it is baffling from an intellectual powerhouse like Jonah. Baffling and aggravating.

I knew this guy whose last name was Bee. No kidding. Now if he were a jeweler, I could totally understand Jonah's objection if the slogan was.... oh, nevermind. But my point is, that it's just a stupid pun!

You know what aggravates me more than Jonah's aggravation with this ad? The fact that I am so aggravated by his aggravation. GGGGGAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

[Edited later (still stewing about this): When Michelin showed a little baby riding around on rain slicked roads and implored us to buy its tires "because so much is riding on" them, should we have taken them to literally mean that we're child endangering sociopaths if we don't? Nooooo. So should we take Kay literally to mean that we shouldn't expect a kiss if we don't bring the bling? Nooooo.

I guess my point is this: I can grant Jonah his premise that any woman who expects a bauble for every kiss is indeed a whore. But the premise is a total non-sequitur. That is not the intent or the inference to be taken from the ad. ]

[Edited still later: Welcome Cornerites! Thanks Jonah for sending everyone my way. Feel free to poke around, though posting has been awfully light lately. By the way - as Jonah's Military Guy attests in the comments below, Jonah's still wrong.]

Newsweek has posted a quick interview with this wacko in which she makes two simply incredible claims: 1) the media hurt her peace movement by failing to give it adequate coverage. 2) The media has never questioned Bush about his "lies" about WMD's in Iraq.

Wait. Make that three: 3) She is responsible for bringing the Iraq war to the "forefront of American consciousness."

The woman is crazy. C-R-A-Z-Y!!! In anwers to 3 of only 4 questions, she demonstrates that she is completely unhinged and doesn't have even the slightest grasp on reality. Which is actually kind of sad, I guess.

These posts on The Corner pretty well crystallize what I've been thinking about the spying relevations, etc.

From Mark Levin:

Finally, with allegations of lying about pre-war intelligence, exposing prison "rendition" in Europe, demanding withdrawal from Iraq, undermining aggressive interrogation of al-Qaeda terrorists, killing key aspects of the Patriot Act, and now eavesdropping, is it just me, or is there an unrelenting attack on core aspects of our post-9/11 homeland security efforts? I have no doubt we will win the war on terrorism overseas, as long as we succeed in overcoming the same domestic elements--among them, media, academia, anti-war left--which brought defeat in Vietnam. After all, 9/11 was no distant act of war, the polls indicate the American people see much of this as partisan politics by the Democrats, and it reinforces the view that Democrats are weak on national security.

Perhaps it's time to more aggressively scrutinize the motives and tactics of the war's opponents--rather than mostly react to their allegations. So far, the opponents have largely received a pass. It is often assumed that they mean well, that they want us to win the war, that they would never put politics before country, and so forth. Yet, many on the Left--including Democrat leaders in Congress--feel no similar obligation when they accuse the president of lying, authorizing torture, and violating the Constitution. Besides, they are undermining our war effort.

And Michael Ledeen:

Mark:

How right you are. It reminds me of the outrage expressed by Senator Kennedy when news of the mining of the Nicaraguan harbors (with non-lethal devices) broke in the press. The State Dept guy in charge of Latin America at the time, Tony Motley, sat and listened to TK emote for a while and then said "just remember one thing, Senator. More people died at Chappaquiddick than in Puerta Managua." Of course the committee had been briefed over and over again, but the press wasn't interested in pointing fingers at the Democratic legislators, any more than they are today.

People with children and spouses fighting terrorists around the world have no trouble understanding what is going on here; it's a systematic attempt to destroy the Bush presidency, regardless of the cost to the nation or to the cause of liberty on the planet. It's disgusting.

"No matter how deeply you distrust the government's judgment, you are too trusting."

For those of you wondering, "What will happen when all television signals are transmitted digitally? What about people with analog televisions?" Fear no more. The goverment is here to help.

Seriously. And it's right down the road in Mason, Ohio.

And some have doubted the authenticity of this video. Some think it's edited; some think it's completely fake. It's not.

Still have doubts? Check out the Today Show feature.

The Victoria's Secret Fashion Show is not being broadcast in HD! WTF?

I am outraged. And as a show of my disgust, I am officially boycotting CBS starting @ 11:00 pm ET, tomorrow. For a full 24 hours. NO CBS watching at all. None.

UPDATE: Call off the boycott. The show was broadcast in yummy HD goodness. Kudos to CBS for their wisdom.

Hey, looky here! Turns out I have a blog! Sorry for the long absence. I have no excuse.

Anyway, since we're in the Christmas season, I thought you all might enjoy this little rant about how ridiculously PC the holiday has become. Those offended by coarse language would be advised to visit. www.disneyworld.com instead.

Merry F-ing Christmas!

The British are feeling the pinch in relation to recent bombings and have raised their security level from "Miffed" to "Peeved." Soon though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." Londoners have not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies all but ran out. Terrorists have been re-categorised from "Tiresome" to a "Bloody Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance" warning level was during the great fire of 1666.

Also, the French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide". The only two higher levels in France are "Surrender" and "Collaborate." The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively paralysing the country's military capability.

It's not only the English and French that are on a heightened level of alert. Italy has increased the alert level from "shout loudly and excitedly" to "elaborate military posturing". Two more levels remain, "ineffective combat operations" and "change sides".

The Germans also increased their alert state from "disdainful arrogance" to "dress in uniform and sing marching songs". They also have two higher levels: "invade a neighbour" and "lose".

Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual and the only threat they worry about is NATO pulling out of Brussels.

Hat tip: The Corner

This should be required viewing for anyone who parrots the looney Left's claim that "Bush lied."

If he did, he wasn't alone.

Note: The Professor points out that the music in the background is Traffic's The Low Spark of High-heeled Boys. Coincidence?

This test is kind of fun. See if you can discern which smiles are fake and which are real.

I scored 19 out of 20 correct. How many can you get right?

Most of them don't even make me crack a smile. This one made me laugh out loud.

Subject: Teaching math

A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price. What is his profit?

Teaching Math In 1960:

A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price, or $80. What is his profit?

Teaching Math In 1970:

A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80. Did he make a profit?

Teaching Math In 1980:

A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20. Your assignment: Underline the number 20.

Teaching Math In 1990:

A logger cuts down a beautiful forest because he is selfish and inconsiderate and cares nothing for the habitat of animals or the preservation of our woodlands. He does this so he can make a profit of $20.

What do you think of this way of making a living? Topic for class participation after answering the question:

How did the birds and squirrels feel as the logger cut down their homes? (There are no wrong answers)

Teaching Math In 2005:

Un hachero vende una carretada demaderapara $100. El costo de la producción es $80.....

Well, I certainly am rooting for the French and their new get tough curfew.

If it works, we ought to post "No Hijacking, Please" signs in every airport.

Not even sure where to begin. But if I were able to muster a few words about this news story, I am sure among them would be the phrase, "I'd like to party with these girls......"

Go, Panthers! [Update]: Check that - Bad, Panthers! They've fired them? Don't they understand the impact on attendance this would have had? Idiots. And when was the last time they fired (or even disciplined) a player for either a bar fight or alleged sexual improprieties?

[Update]: As either Bob or Tom said on the radio this morning, the easiest way to avoid this problem in the future, ladies? Use the men's room. For damn sure nobody in there would have complained.

How long do you think this took? (Beware the loud music)

Hat tip: Mr. Goldberg.

Bork on Alito:

Still, we do not know how the new chief justice and Justice-to-be Alito will rule on Roe and other liberal constitutional travesties of the past. Why, then, should conservatives support them? Because we can at least be sure that they will not start inventing yet new and previously unheard of constitutional rights. That would in itself be a vast improvement over the imperialistic Court majority’s drive to remake American culture and morality. That it will take at least one more justice of the Roberts-Scalia-Thomas-Alito stripe to return the Court to jurisprudential respectability is no reason not to support Judge Alito to the full. Let us rejoice in what we have gained.

Can you imagine if that "one more justice" were Bork? Imagine: Roberts-Scalia-Thomas-Alito-Bork.

The mind reels.

How could I be a 36 year old highly educated person and have no idea about this?

Amazing.

Follow the link the make the chicken dance.

Man, there have to be a whole lot of disappointed lefties out there.

Talk about a huge build up to nothing. The Libby indictments stink. I agree with Ledeen. They basically boil down to a he said/she said dispute between what Libby told the investigators he said to various journalists, and what the journalists say he said. Apparently, the journalist's word is gold and support enough alone for a federal indictment for obstructing justice and perjury.

Don't believe me? Here's MSNBC's synopsis of the charges

Count one: obstruction of justice
The grand jury charges that Libby did “knowingly and corruptly endeavor to influence, obstruct and impede the due administration of justice... by misleading and deceiving the grand jury” about when and how he learned that covert operative Valerie Plame worked for the CIA. He is also accused of misleading the grand jury about how he disclosed that information to the media.

Well, there's no support for the first sentence in the facts alleged in the indictment. As to the second sentence, if the allegations about Libby's accounts of his conversations with the journalists are correct, they seem to indicate that Libby lied to the journalists, but there is no indication in the facts alleged that Libby lied to the grand jury about the truth of his knowledge of Plame's identity. In other words, its a crime for Libby to tell the Grand Jury that he told Russert that he didn't know that Plame was Wilson's wife only if Libby also claims that he actually didn't know that Plame was Wilson's wife. It's not a crime for him to have known that Plame was Wilson's wife and lie to Russert about it (it was actually his legal duty!)

Count two: false statement The grand jury charges that Libby “did knowingly and willfully make a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statement” in an FBI investigation. Specifically, the indictment says Libby misled FBI agents in response to questions about a conversation with Tim Russert of NBC News in July 2003.

Well, that only sticks if the jury believes Russert and not Libby. Do you really want to indict a federal official on he said/she said evidence?

Count three: false statement Libby is charged with misleading FBI agents about his July 2003 conversation with another reporter, Matt Cooper of Time Magazine.

Ditto.

Count four: perjury After taking an oath to testify truthfully, Libby knowingly made a “false material declaration” about his conversation with Russert, the grand jury alleges.

Ditto.

Count five: perjury Also under oath, Libby is accused of knowingly making a “false material declaration” about his conversation with Cooper.

Ditto, again. Counts 2 and 3 are essentially the same as 4 and 5, the only difference being who Libby was telling his side of the story to at the time, the FBI or the Grand Jury.

To repeat, there is no allegation in the indictment that Libby lied to the Federal Grand Jury or the FBI about his knowledge of Valerie Plame's identity and when he learned it.

Where's the crime, Fitz? Is this the best ya got? 'Cuz it ain't good enough.

And don't you usually lead with your best stuff? If this is what he's leading with, I think the White House has very little to worry about.

A friend sent me this article about the "crisis" in MLB. Apparently, there is a growing sentiment that there aren't enough African-Americans on the rosters.

But I tend to agree with my friend:

I know you aren't a baseball guy but this article really isn't about "baseball" per se. I guess what troubles me about this article is that A) People are going around counting the number of each race on each team; and B) that there doesn't seem to be any sort of concern about the number or thereof of caucasians on the rosters of other sports. Shouldn't it all be about who the best is for the sport or position? Since the growth of baseball is coming from the college draft should we start diluting the academic and talent "bars" thereby creating more "opportunity"? I just can't figure out what these people want. Does everything need to have a quota attached?

And if this article is correct, and approximately 9% of the major leaguers are African-American, then is there really a crisis? 9% is pretty much representative of the population as a whole, isn't it? [Ed: African-Americans comprise approx. 12% of the population as a whole] Still, 9% isn't far off.

What about the number of whites in the NFL and NBA. We don't see white commentators bemoaning the lack of white players, do we?

Has it ever occurred to anyone that blacks simply choose not to play baseball? Egads! Life choices governed by free will, not determined by the cool of their skin! It's radical, I know.

Gubernatorial Suicide Pact Tragedy.

Leading intellectuals will meet next week to discuss its replacement.

Details here.

Except to make people like me put "See 'Domino'" at the top of my 'to do' list?

How does a story like this get green-lighted exactly?

Horny reporter: Keira Knightley is topless in her next movie!

Editor: Great! Think of a news angle and print it!

Horny Reporter: There isn't a news angle.

Editor: Screw it! Just print it!

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - More than three dozen Palestinian police officers broke into the parliament building in Gaza City on Monday, firing in the air to protest a lack of bullets...

Perhaps if they shot fewer of them into the air, they'd have more when it came time to do their job.

But maybe I'm being too analytical.

From The Onion.

Laugh out loud hilarious.

Some guy just set a new Guinness world record for T.V. watching after watching television for 69 hours and 48 minutes.

All I have to say is, THAT'S IT? Are you kidding me? Had I any idea whatsoever that acheiving a world record was so easy, I would have done it a long time ago. That's not even three straight days. Hell, I could do that with my eyes clo..... well, you know what I mean.

Hell, all I'd need is an Alias marathon, all four seasons strung together back to back, and I could watch TV for 88 hours without even blinking.

But really, I don't need that. As my wife can attest, plop me down in front of this glorious beast, and I can watch anything for 72 hours, easy.

My prediction: that this was a world record capable of achieving came as a surprise to many people. This record will be broken before the year is out. (And I can't promise it won't be me.)

General Honore is my hero.

I got myself one of these.

Can't stop looking at it.

Ergo, no blogging.

Sorry.

I mean, come on. The O.C. in high definition? Please. Can you blame me?

No, you can not.

I love the new "Bush doesn't care about black people" t-shirt. An instant classic! I think that is one of those things that will be taken up by both sides.

For example, when I was a wee freshman in college in 1987, I had a poster of a map of the world on my wall entitled "The World According to Ronald Reagan." To give you a flavor for the map, my favorite part was a designation for a group of islands in the New Zealand neighborhood that said, "Palestinian Homeland.")

I had it hanging because I thought it was hilarious in its absurdity. I don't think I realized that I was mocking people who actually believed in it until I saw it hanging in the dorm room of a flaming liberal lefty Geraldine Ferraro wannabe. (She was the perfect caricature of her type - she decried elitism while living in the "honors" dorm. Cute, though. But I digress.)

So too, I think, will W supporters and Air America denizens alike be sporting this t-shirt.

Hat tip: Jonah.

From the Washington Post:

In Katrina's wake, Louisiana politicians and other critics have complained about paltry funding for the Army Corps in general and Louisiana projects in particular. But over the five years of President Bush's administration, Louisiana has received far more money for Corps civil works projects than any other state, about $1.9 billion; California was a distant second with less than $1.4 billion, even though its population is more than seven times as large.

Much of that Louisiana money was spent to try to keep low-lying New Orleans dry. But hundreds of millions of dollars have gone to unrelated water projects demanded by the state's congressional delegation and approved by the Corps, often after economic analyses that turned out to be inaccurate. Despite a series of independent investigations criticizing Army Corps construction projects as wasteful pork-barrel spending, Louisiana's representatives have kept bringing home the bacon.

Read the whole thing.

Just try to wrap your brain around these two paragraphs:

Milling about the Reliant entrance, Sheila Nathan, 38, told her teary-eyed toddler that she was too tired to hold him.

"I'm trying to make it a fairy tale so they won't panic," said Nathan, who had four grandchildren in tow. "I have to be strong for them."

Mind-boggling, no? They come from an otherwise great story of perseverence and self-reliance in the face of official ineptitude.

You may have heard that the first refugees to arrive at the Astrodome were aboard a comandeered school bus. It's a true story.

Jonah Goldberg just posted an e-mail that I sent to him regarding an earlier post.

Here's my e-mail to Jonah.

Jonah -

I can't believe that you posted your "Navy Commander" reader's
comments without comment. A few of his assertions defy commonsense.

"Yes, things went wrong but, believe it or not, many more things
went right. "

What things? What single thing on a local level went right? The
decision to evacuate the city? It was a day late. The ability to
evacuate those who had no means to do so themselves? No existent.
The ability to maintain control of looting? Nope.

"The First Responders moved in and did their job."

They did? By what measure? What discernible effect did the job of
the first responders (I assume he means the local authorities) have on
the current situation? For instance, would it be safe right now to
drop in food and water to the convention center, with no stabilizing
federal force pre-positioned to control the crowd? If not why not?
And whose fault would that be?

The fact is that the the scene on the ground is a total and
complete failure of the local and state authorities having any
foresight and ability to protect and defend their own constituents.
The fact that the federal government has been caught flat-footed by
the local authorities complete inability to maintain any kind of
order is not that surprising. I don't think anybody could have
anticipated the utter chaos the local authorities are not only
complicit in, but completely responsible for. The failure here is on
a local level, plain and simple. Simply put, it is not unreasonable
for the federal goverment to expect the locals to hold down the fort
for a few days until the cavalry can arrive.

And of course the federal cavalry will arrive. And of course, I
and all my friends in all 50 states will be paying for the bail out
and the clean up and the rebuilding. Something that could have been
prevented if the local planners in a city built several feet below
sea level had had the incredible forsight required to prevent or at
the very least prepare for the aftermath of a massive flood. Gosh,
who could possibly have foretold the possibility of a hurricane that
causes massive flooding in N.O.? I mean, what are the chances?

I was responding to this.

Captain Ed has the transcript of a great exchange with President Clinton explaining why the complainers (outside of New Orleans) need to shut the hell up.

“They don't have a clue what's going on down there,” Mayor Ray Nagin told WWL-AM Thursday night. "Excuse my French everybody in America but I am pissed.”

You know, Mr. Mayor, it's your damn city. It's built on ground several feet below sea level. It is riddled with levees, but not one of them is redundent, and not one of them is built to withstand a category 4 hurricane. Whose fault is that?

What the hell kind of civic planning is that? Why in the hell would a city on the Gulf of Mexico, whose very life depends on the levees that hold back the river, Lake P., and ultimately, the Gulf, not build levees that can handle a Category 4 hurricane? Why the hell wouldn't they be prepared for a Category 5 hurricane?

What's the civic planning there? Just a wing and a prayer? If you aren't going to at least build levees capable of withstanding the worst hurricane possible, wouldn't you at least build a couple of redundent levees in some of the more critical spots. No? Why not?

And if you are going to take these basic - very elementary steps -- how can you not be prepared for the aftermath when the inevitable happens? How can the city itself not have some contingency plans in place for this occurrence? Where's the civic planning?

Everyone is talking about the national guard, etc. not having enough pre-positioned supplies and provisions. Well where the hell is the city's pre-positioned provisions? If they city won't provide sufficient protection from the inevitable, the least it could do is be somewhat prepared for the aftermath.

Forgive me, Mr. Mayor, but you and your entire infrastructure are completely incompetent to run a major American city. That the City of New Orleans was caught completely off guard by this tragedy, so much so that you couldn't even hold the place together for at least a couple of days before the feds could come in for relief,is unforgivable. What you did, or failed to do, by your inept planning and forsight is what has caused this human tragedy. It's not the federal government's fault, no matter how much you'd like to pin the blame on them.

The people who are suffering in New Orleans don't deserve what's happening to them. It's a tragedy on a scale that this country never imagined would happen within its own borders. And it will be your legacy, Mr. Mayor. Not the federal government's, and not George Bush's.

Byron York recently criticized Bush's five week "vacation" in Crawford, saying that politically, at least, it's too long. But I have to disagree. I think he's way of the mark in his criticism of Bush's sojourn in Crawford.

York says:

Even given the wonders of modern communications which allow him to stay in touch with virtually everyone virtually all the time, does the president really need to spend five weeks of the summer based at his home in Crawford?

But it is exactly because of the modern wonders of communication that the President can and should, if he pleases, spend five weeks in Crawford. I, for one, like a President that hates Washington and can't wait to leave. Aside from appearances (i.e. political ramifications), I can't think of, and York doesn't suggest, any detriment to his ability to fulfill his duties. Who cares where he does it from, other than the liberal MSM and its fans on the left?

York says there is "no doubt," but I would counter that there is "no evidence" that even from a political and communications standpoint, the President would be in a better position to deal with the various August happenings this year if he were in Washington. But York already conceded that communications-wise there's no disability inherent in being in Crawford. (See quote above). And policitically, if he wasn't in Crawford, the MSM, etc. would just find some other angle to attack the President. The picture York incongruously attached to his post is the case in point. It's being trumpted by Bush-haters as another example of Bush being out of touch -- playfully playing he guitar while Katrina ravaged the Gulf coast. But whether he flew to California from Crawford or from Washington makes no difference to the left's idea that Bush was callously indifferent to the suffering of the victims of Katrina. (And of course, the idea itself is ridiculous - the President is the President to the people of all 50 states. The idea that he should adopt some somber affect in light of the tragedy on the Gulf coast is ridiculous. Of course he's been effected by the tragedy. But he wouldn't be much of a leader if it paralyzed him.)

Why provide the left the aid and comfort of the imprimatur of an NR columnist for their pernicious meme that Bush is somehow failing as President for wanting to live away from Washington while fulfilling his constitutional duties? Bush's choice to sleep in Crawford has had no demonstrable effect on his ability to do the job that we entrusted to him.

Goodbye, Maurice.

I can't recall another single person who has made more spectacularly stupid decisions in such a short amount of time. The scope of the stupidity and the rapidity with which he sank from the next-two-time-Heisman-winner to couldn't-last-six-months-in-the-pros is truly breathtaking.

I'd feel sorry for him if he had a single redeeming quality to feel sorry for. But he doesn't. And so I don't.

Anybody have any ideas? I got nuthin' here. Haven't seen a thing in the news that interests me in the least.

Just to fill some space and give everybody something to click on, I'll post this again. Because it's AWESOME.

Sometimes you have to search your heart - reach deep down inside your soul and ask yourself a question and promise to give yourself and honest answer. The question: Am I making a good faith donation to charity, or am I just trying to get rid of junk that I would otherwise have to pay to dispose of?

Everyone knows what I am talking about when I say "hobby horse" right? The plastic horse attached to a frame with springs, right?

Like this:

Kids love them. Mine do. They can spend minutes on end on it.

Anyway - I am sure kids who are disadvantaged would love the opportunity to own such a magnificent steed as well. Their faces probably light up like the sun on a perfect spring morn when their parents are lucky enough to find one at a second hand shop.

So what kind of depravity must lurk in a man's heart to do this?

What's a kid supposed to do with this? The damn thing can't even stand up on its own! Unless the the kid wants to play "Afleet Alex at the Preakness" he's pretty much out of luck, fun-wise, don't ya think?

I think maybe she is! Here's the lede in the story about LaToyia Figueroa:

PHILADELPHIA - Police discovered the remains of a missing pregnant woman and quickly arrested the father of her unborn child Saturday, ending an exhaustive, monthlong search.

Yea, K-Lo! Her seemingly one-woman crusade starts to bear fruit! (There's an ugly mixed metaphor. Hope Taranto doesn't see this!)

Second graph:

District Attorney Lynne M. Abraham said Stephen Poaches would be charged with two counts of murder and related offenses for the deaths of 24-year-old LaToyia Figueroa and her fetus.

Oh. Well, keep at it K-Lo. There's work to be done.

If you are going to get your picture taken with a Siberian Tiger, I think you have to assume some risk.

This girl rolled the dice and lost. The prop I had in my senior pictures was a golf club. I survived. Her prop was a man-eating predator. She didn't.

So you plop prey down next to a carnivore predator. What did you expect to happen? Why did the Tiger have to die? What did he do wrong, exactly? I don't mean to go all PETA here, but killing the Tiger in these circumstances seems wrong.

I was playing with my new Blackberry the other day, and pulled up the local radar to check the incoming weather. Up popped a full color map of Ohio, with the familiar green and yellow blobs of rain on its way across the state.

I turned to my five year old daughter and said "How cool is that? I have a picture of the current radar map here on my handheld."

And she looked at me blankly, like "Yea, so?" And it occurred to me that she has no perspective for how amazing that is. Of course you can check the local radar with your handheld wireless device!

I didn't get my first computer until is was 15 or so (An Atari 520ST - 512k RAM, and a blazing fast 8mhz processor, thank you very much), and I thought it was the most awesome piece of machinery ever invented. (Damn, I wish I had kept that.)

And I realize that the hand-me-down computer I gave to my daughter when she was two (!) -- which I couldn't use anymore because it was waaaaay too antiquated -- was more powerful than anything NASA had to use to land people on the Moon, much less my own first computer.

When I got my computer in 1986, there wasn't much to do with it other than word processing, basic gaming, and if you were really advanced and into exotic computer geekdom: creating BASIC programs. WOO! Good times. (I actually met Woody Hayes while attending a summer computer camp at OSU when I was in high school - but that's another story.) Al Gore hadn't invented the internet yet, so it's not like I was cruising the net. The rudimentary BBS's didn't exactly hold my attention.

And this is all when I am already 15 years old! So, every new advance -- like, say, a wireless handheld browser that displays real-time local radar -- is understandably appreciated by my generation with amazement.

But my five year old rolls her eyes when I exclaim the wonders of a handheld wireless web browser.

Kids.

Hey Kids! Pretend to slide to your death down the deck of the sinking Titanic, just like the real passengers! Except the real passengers weren't pretending! They really did die! But don't let that ruin your fun!

[Update: Welcome Cornerites! Stick around and browse the main page!]

I love Rome. But I gotta agree with Derb about Paris. I think my French-bashing credentials are fairly well established, but I think Gay Paris is fantastic (I also like the He-Man parts too). I'm a big fan of great cities and it's unavoidable that Paris goes on the list. We love to criticize the French "social model" but the truth is it's great so long as you have a well-paying job, lack initiative, love to lounge around in cafés, shop, eat well and don't want to work very hard. That may be a terrible way to organize a society, but it's a wonderful way to set-up an occassional vacation spot.

Kinda makes me want to visit.

Still sore, Clarett goes in for MRI

This is a classic New York Times hatchet job. It manages to dredge up the completely dead Plame investigation, smear Bush once again with falsehoods about the intelligence prior to 9/11, and ironically equate Bush with the French, all while dripping with contempt for the heartland.

After explaining that other WH staffers were off to places like Maine, Florida and Greece, Elisabeth Bumiller notes that

Mr. Bush, of course, was in the less exotic blast furnace of his Texas ranch, settling in for a five-week stay on the prairie that will be his longest time away from Washington as president.

Get it? Bush is an absentee President. Lolligaging at his ranch for 5 whole weeks!! A little bitter Liz? Didn't bring enough moisturizer or what?

But in his first days away, Mr. Bush was relatively busy. He gave a speech on Wednesday in Grapevine, Tex., and met with the president of Colombia at the ranch on Thursday. He is to travel to New Mexico today, meet with his economic advisers and hold a news conference at the ranch tomorrow, travel to Illinois on Wednesday, meet with his foreign policy team and hold another news conference back at the ranch on Thursday, go to a Republican fund-raising lunch at a neighboring ranch on Friday and attend a Little League championship game in Waco, Tex., on Saturday.

Wait a sec. That means Bush is good! He's not really on vacation! He's working from Crawford! Good Bush! George is the Best! Right?

Noooooooooo. Because the reason for all the work is EVIL. Because whereever Bush is, even if it's Crawford, Texas, evil is afoot. Worse than evil, its a COVER-UP!!!!

One reason for the activity might be the desire to be in purposeful motion on another anniversary of the now-infamous C.I.A. briefing that Mr. Bush received at the ranch on Aug. 6, 2001. That briefing, which informed the new president that the terrorist network Al Qaeda had maintained an active presence in the United States for years and could be preparing for hijackings here, created a political uproar when its contents were eventually made public.

Critics have long called it a symbol of the administration's complacency in the slow summer days before the catastrophe of Sept. 11, 2001. Administration officials have countered that there was no specific information to act on, and that the briefing never warned that planes could be used as missiles.

So, to recap, the reason he went to the Little League game is to deflect attention from a briefing he got four years ago that may (according to the President's critics) or may not (according to sane people the world over) have provided warning of the potential of something that no one in their right mind would have comtemplated would be on the order of 9/11.

And not only that, but Liz takes her opportunity to rehash the non-story of the decade, providing yet another sinister reason behind Bush's August vacation. I feel silly for even putting this part in, because of course you all know the real reason Bush is in Crawford this month. It's because he's (lets all say it together):

...fleeing Washington to escape the federal investigation into who leaked the name of a Central Intelligence Agency officer to reporters, a potential crime.

Obviously. Because with Bush hunkered down in Crawford instead of Washington, no one would ever write a story about the Plame investigation. (OMG. I used her name - I hope I don't get deposed.) And God knows the federal investigator would never think to look in Texas if he had to ask Bush or his staff any questions.

And of course, Karl Rove will be joining the Pres-- What? You don't know who Mr. Rove is? I can't believe it. Luckily, Liz is here to clue you in. Turns out he's the same Mr. Rove

who has testified to a grand jury in the leak investigation

Thanks for clearing that up, Liz (or is it "Lis"?) Because I had forgotten that aspect of the story. Certainly an essential detail not to be ignored in this story about how hot it is at the ranch and how much you - I mean all civilized people despise it.

If it weren't so pathetic and seriously off-putting, this story would just be a laugh riot!

Bonus Taranto metaphor alert: Ever wondered why it's like a "blast furnace" in Crawford? It's because of the "blistering sun."

And for what it's worth, the forcast for tomorrow:

Washington, D.C.:

Clouds and sun with a t-storm High: 87° F RealFeel®: 95° F

Some sun with a thunderstorm High: 93° F RealFeel®: 100° F

So, if you are a NYT reporter, and you are lucky enough to get off the Crawford beat and get to head back to Washington, better take a sweater.

Nothing confirms it more than their ridiculous decision to ban schools from using Native American derived mascots during post-season tournaments. What's worse here? The stupid PC genesis of the idea, or the half-assed implementation? I mean, come on guys - if you are going to take a stand, have the balls to go all the way. This I guarantee - if the NCAA had control of the football post-season, this dumb-ass idea would have been dead on arrival. Put another way, if Florida State were a basketball power, this dumb-ass idea would have been dead on arrival.

At first I thought this story was stupid beyond words, and so I decided to refrain from reducing my thoughts to the written word. But then this piece by Bob Ford caught my eye, with a classic quote from the spokesman (sorry - spokesperson) for the San Diego State Aztecs:

[The NCAA] has already let San Diego State off the hook after the school argued that the Aztecs culture was not a "North American culture, but a culture based in what is now Mexico," according to a university spokesman.

That's a neat piece of scrambling, even if it doesn't say much for the geography department.

For all of you who graduated from SDSU, here's a map of North America:

For instance.......

Coach reprimanded for licking players’ cuts

and

Seattle man dies after sex with horse

Do I have a comment on either of these stories? No I do not.

There's an interesting debate among the conservative potentates at NRO about the push to have 16th Ave. in Washington, D.C. named after the late, great Ronald Reagan. (And I bet you thought conservatives would never debate the wisdom of naming something after RWR! Here's an insight: Change is not readily embraced by most conservatives.)

Anyway, my favorie comment comes from Mark Levin:

NEVER ENOUGH REAGAN. [Mark R. Levin]

If it were up to me, Maryland itself would be renamed Reagan.

Indeed.

Sometimes, having the good fortune to survive a plane crash just isn't enough.

Hours after the crash and rescues, at least one passenger was less than complimentary about the work of some of the flight attendants during the accident.

Gwen Dunlop, a Toronto resident who was on the flight returning from vacation in France, said when the plane first touched down the passengers believed they had landed safely and clapped with relief.

“Only seconds later, it started really moving and obviously it wasn’t OK,” said Dunlop. “At some point the wing was off. The oxygen masks never came down; the plane was filling up with smoke.”

“One of the hostesses said, ‘You can calm down, it’s OK,’ and yet the plane was on fire and smoke was pouring in,” Dunlop told The AP. “I don’t like to criticize, but the staff did not seem helpful or prepared.”

Dunlop said some passengers went down emergency chutes, while others jumped out on their own. “We were all trying to go up a hill; it was all mud and we lost our shoes. We were just scrambling, people with children.”

She said the pouring rain, lightning and thunder added to the drama. “We were just thrown into the weather.”

Yes. How rude of the flight attendants not to be waiting with an umbrella at the bottom of escape chute. The indignity!

And I hate to shatter your illusions, ma'am, but methinks that you do, in fact, like to complain.

On the way home from work today, I saw a lovely young lady in front of me driving a Toyota Celica with two bumper stickers:

Save the environment - Plant a Bush back in Texas.

Cute. And...

When in doubt, start a war.

Not cute, and facile to boot.

Those kinds of bumper stickers make me want to interview the driver.

Me: Why do you think we are at war?

Driver: Well, the war is just about oil.

Me: How do you feel about oil exploration in ANWR?

Driver: I'm against it. It destroys the environment.

Me: How do you feel about nuclear power?

Driver: I'm against it. It destroys the environment.

Me: O.k. Then shut the hell up, please. And while you're at it, why not do your part and get yourself a Prius?

White touted Bush ties to help get federal post

Now he investigates GOP, Noe
(THE BLADE/ALLAN DETRICH )

COLUMBUS — U.S. Attorney Gregory White, a leader in a multiagency task force investigating powerful Republicans in Ohio, asked for help from Gov. Bob Taft’s office to get the federal post he now holds, records released by Mr. Taft’s office yesterday show.

No shit, guys! How the fuck do you think political appointees get their jobs? Sending a resume followed by a cold call?

How's this for your next headline and sub-head:

Sky Is Blue

Has been for years

• Ozzfest will return to Germain Amphitheater on Tuesday.

Between the opening of the gates at 10 a.m. and the end of headliner Black Sabbath’s set, many metal bands, including one with Will Smith’s wife on lead vocals, will perform. They include:

Iron Maiden, Shadows Fall, Gizmachi, It Dies Today, Arch Enemy, Black Label Society, Rob Zombie, Killswitch Engage, As I Lay Dying, Mastodon, A Dozen Furies, the Haunted, In Flames, Soilwork, the Black Dahlia Murder, Trivium, Bury Your Dead and Wicked Wisdom (featuring Jada Pinkett Smith).

Uh, come again?

Go see it.

Two hours of Scarlett Johansson. 'Nuff said?

Date: June 26, 2005
Temp: 95, Humidity - 1000%

7:00 - Enter Park

7:10 - Eat @ La Rosa's

7:20 - Walk to The Beast

7:22 - Wonder if they regret that giant Tomb Raider statue thingy.

7:23 - See The Italian Job in action for the first time. Cool.

7:30 - Ride The Beast.

7:32 - Wish with every fiber of my being that the restraint hadn't just ratched itself down one more notch.

7:33 - Remark to self that even if Z hits 48" this year, this is WAAAAAAAAAAY too intense for her.

7:35 - Walk to Viper.

7:37 - Lament the absence of the Flying Eagles.

7:38 - WTF? There's just a grassy area where the Flying Eagles used to be. It doesn't look like the Italian Job even encroaches on the space that the Flying Eagles used to occupy. WTF!

7:40 - Ride the Viper.

7:42 - Remark to self that that is one of my favorite - and in my opinion, one of the must underrated - coasters around.

7:43 - Notice that Flying Eagles would fit nicely where the stupid pay per use bungee thing is.

7:44 - Wonder if they regret putting Flight of Fear over in the middle of nowhere on the other side of the Racer, discreetly tucked away in the middle of the Midway.

7:45 - Think to self, evidently not, since it's the first ride today with a line.

7:50 - Remark to self that FoF is a better little coaster than I remember.

7:55 - Remark to self that Flying Eagles would fit nicely where the stupid and pointless water tower decoration is in the middle of the Action Zone.

7:57 - What? Another line? This is an outrage. Decide to speak to management about the crowds.

8:20 - Ride Face/Off. Remark to self that these xeroxed Verkoma boomerangs are pointless. Make note to complain to management that they only have one train running on this ride, which creates an outrageous line.

8:30 - Note to self while exiting park that there's room for about four Flying Eagles where the stupid fountains are just inside the entrance.

One hour, four coasters, much fun.

Now looking forward to trip South in September. Can't wait to stop at Carowinds to ride the Flying Eagles.

The guy who got himself gunned down by London police definitely deserves a Darwin Award.

London police kill man day after transit blasts

Funny that Lileks would be ranting about prudery this week. I was just talking with my sister-in-law about what I do not remember, but the conversation turned to the evolving standards of decency. (For my younger readers -- yes; we used to have standards for such things.)

She laughed about how her grandfather was mortified and outraged by the Underalls commercials when they first appeared. And you remember how salacious they were don't you?

Remember how the butt would shake ever so slightly? Egads! Society, here's the handbasket; hell's thataway.

Aw, screw the handbasket. Just take the General Lee.

Professional wrestling in Bolivia.

Cirque is due to roll into our humble burg next month, and as my friends who know me know, no one is looking forward to it more than I. My enchantment with Cirque is baffling, I admit, but I just can't get enough of it. This despite the fact that is profoundly weird, really.

Bryan Curtis has a great article in Slate about Cirque's unexplainable popularity, which he discusses in the context of the lastest touring show, Varekai:

I arrived a few minutes late and found the stage occupied by a small goat-man with forest leaves protruding from his trousers and his hair gelled into a three-point salute. "Pfffft!" he said, to much laughter. A few moments later, an angel dressed in white descended from the heavens. The goat-man regarded the angel with mock fury until the angel rose and began to perform trapeze stunts with the aid of a hammock. This seemed to satisfy the goat-man and he departed at stage right. Then there were some earthbound stunts from a troupe of flame-colored acrobats; children dressed in puffy suits as if they were about to train attack dogs, performing with bolas; then empty-eyed ogres dressed as samurai warriors and rhythmically stomping their feet. That brought the first act to a close.

Varekai was so profoundly jarring, so uncertain in its narrative intentions, that when the lights came up nobody in the audience could think to move. At least at the end of similarly exotic occasions—like a Megadeth concert or a White House press conference—the crowd knows when to get up. A small boy sitting a few feet to my right and using a voice reserved for pre-adolescent terror turned to his mother and shrieked, "What's going on?" He spoke for all of us.

Curtis goes on to conclude that:

A great deal of Cirque du Soleil's magic comes from its unapologetic Frenchness. Or, if you prefer, its Quebecoisity. By this, I mean that Cirque du Soleil's shows make absolutely no sense at all. I studied the plot of Varekai for a solid hour before attending the performance, but by the end of the second act I was blubbering the same nonsense as the goat-man.

Well, I can't disagree with any of that. But still, I do love it so.

Go read it..

Here's but the smallest morsel to egg you on:

Here's another story you may have missed this week:

''Iran will resume uranium enrichment if the European Union does not recognize its right to do so, two Iranian nuclear negotiators said in an interview published Tuesday.''

Got that? If you don't let us go nuclear, we'll go nuclear. Negotiate that, John Kerry.

Like I said. Go read it. NOW.

This article explains that a former player stole six autographed baseballs from his former K-State Coach, Bill Snyder. Here are the important details:

Riley County Police Lt. Tim Hegarty said the six baseballs stolen from Snyder’s home were signed by Mantle, DiMaggio, Whitey Ford, Paul O’Neill, Phil Rizzuto and Yogi Berra.

To which I have to ask: Paul O'Neill?

Gee. So it seems to be turning out that this whole Rove/Wilson/Plame thing is much ado (now THAT's an understatement) about nothing. In the end, it will turn out that no one in the government (much less Rove himself) came anywhere close to outing a covert CIA agent.

The most recent article demonstrating that this non-story, scandal-that-wasn't is slowly running out of steam contains a delightful quote that typifies the twisted, political sham this has become:

The person, who works in the legal profession and spoke only on condition of anonymity because of the secrecy of grand jury proceedings, told The Associated Press [about Rov's grand jury testimony]...

This can best be translated as: "The person, who asked not to be identified because by speaking to the AP he was breaking several laws and the professional rules and code of ethics, said...."

Seriously - why has this become acceptable? Would the same reporter write, "The murderer, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, told the AP that he sexually abused the girl before he strangled her and buried her body."

What? That's totally different you say? Perhaps, but only by a matter of degree. Why does the AP get to decide where to draw the line?

Seriously?

www.stuffonmycat.com

Yep. It is, in fact, exactly what it sounds like.

Well, of course the usual idiots are about gloating over the bombing in London, and using it as evidence that the war on terror is a failure because Islamic whack jobs can still blow up subways and busses.

But Cliff May offers a salient counterpoint:

The attacks of 9/11/01 were highly sophisticated and killed thousands. The attacks of 3/11/04 in Madrid were somewhat less sophisticated and killed hundreds. The attacks of 7/705 appear to have been the work of amateurs and killed dozens.

Anyone see a pattern here?

I think Mr. May makes quick work of those pessimists who think that every bombing is evidence that Bush's approach to terrorism isn't working.

Here's an interesting story about the Cleveland Plain Dealer holding back from publication two investigative reports concerning local and state government because they are afraid that they might be forced some day to reveal the source of the "leaked documents" that the stories would be based upon.

Apparently the PD's editor wrote a piece in the June 30 PD explaining "why it's important to protect sources, and how the public would suffer if reporters' ability to gather news is compromised. He mentioned the potential consequences if the newspaper published the two investigative stories."

The courageous PD editor also says: "Things that are important for the public stand in jeopardy of not getting reported because of the state of the law."

Huh? Isn't part of the journalist's creed to get the truth out, and damn the consequences? Here, they are afraid to put their own necks on the line by publishing what they think is an important story. But the PD won't report it because they might be dragged into court some day to reveal their sources. That, they reason, would chill others in the future from being sources for stories.

So the PD won't publish an important story because their source might suffer some consequence, which would in the future give pause to other potential sources, which in turn would prevent the PD from getting information they need to publish an important future story, which consequently wouldn't get published. Can anyone else spot the Catch-22 here?

Of course, let's not forget that this is all based upon, in the editor's words, "documentation that would have been illegal to share...." Got that? The PD got documents that someone gave to them illegally. And the PD won't base a story on the documents unless they can find some other source for the information in the documents so that they can obfuscate the identity of the person who committed the initial crime of illicitly turning over the documents to the PD.

We in the legal profession have a term for that: aiding and abetting.

Not even the title and subhead can prepare you for the article:

Even in death, man cheers on his Steelers
Smith’s viewing has him dressed in team colors, in front of TV on recliner

This is a HI-larious article about a topless protest in San Fransisco.

So many great things in the article, like the cop (whose last name is "T") explaining why it wasn't illegal:

And it doesn't fall into the category of public nuisance, because it lacks an annoying quality, like the guy who was doing naked yoga at Fisherman's Wharf near a children's school bus stop, he said.

And the part about the nearby panhandler:

The nipple display certainly surprised Chuck Pollock, who has been panhandling around Union Square for the last decade. But he got into the spirit, lifting his T-shirt for passers-by to make them laugh and drop a few coins in his cup.

So many vignettes on modern America to be had here - read the whole thing.

Perhaps my favorite part is the explanation from the protester on why exactly they chose a topless protest:

Breasts Not Bombs said they are trying to make people uncomfortable to get their anti-war message across and to also desensitize people to nudity.

Now just stop me if I'm overthinking this. But what if they succeed with the latter before the former? What will they do then?

Those of you who know me know that my love of the Lord of the Rings movie trilogy know no bounds.

In case any of you thought Peter Jackson might be a one-trick pony,

BEHOLD: KING KONG!

Click on the King Kong logo for the trailer. I'm speechless.

In her article today about the hubris of modern politicians:

This week comes the previously careful Sen. Barack Obama, flapping his wings in Time magazine and explaining that he's a lot like Abraham Lincoln, only sort of better. "In Lincoln's rise from poverty, his ultimate mastery of language and law, his capacity to overcome personal loss and remain determined in the face of repeated defeat--in all this he reminded me not just of my own struggles."

Oh. So that's what Lincoln's for. Actually Lincoln's life is a lot like Mr. Obama's. Lincoln came from a lean-to in the backwoods. His mother died when he was 9. The Lincolns had no money, no standing. Lincoln educated himself, reading law on his own, working as a field hand, a store clerk and a raft hand on the Mississippi. He also split some rails. He entered politics, knew more defeat than victory, and went on to lead the nation through its greatest trauma, the Civil War, and past its greatest sin, slavery.

Barack Obama, the son of two University of Hawaii students, went to Columbia and Harvard Law after attending a private academy that taught the children of the Hawaiian royal family. He made his name in politics as an aggressive Chicago vote hustler in Bill Clinton's first campaign for the presidency.

You see the similarities.

God, I love Peggy Noonan.

Read the whole thing, of course.

I report.

You decide.

As I mentioned a while back, the family went to Walt Disney World. It was an amazing trip! Much fun was had by all.

If you haven't been, or haven't been recently, go. Now.

Sorry for the long hiatus.

(Like you cared.)

When I saw this article about the Canadian Chainsaw Murderer, I started composing a post in my head. It went something like this: "I can't believe the MSM is criticizing the border patrol for not holding someone about whom they had no information to suggest that he had committed any crime."

But then I saw this post by the inestimable Professor Reynolds. He holds the incident up as being an example of why homeland security is a joke. So I thought, "Well, geez... I usually agree with Glenn. I must be wrong. Let me read it again and reassess my opinion.

Nope. I think Glenn's wrong on this one. What if this guy hadn't killed anyone, and the chainsaw was just rusty, or he had used it to, oh, I don't know... say, tear down his red barn (o.k., I'm stretching, but stay with me here.) [OOOOOoooo wait! What if he was a new agey artist on his way to performing Chainsaw In Red Paint at a National Endowment of the Arts function?] How quickly would someone on the left jump up and down and shout ASHCROFT!! in an ACLU meeting to incite a lefty riot about how citizen's rights were being trampled by the border patrol, who had detained this innocent man for an excessive period of time for no better reason than they didn't like the look of his chain saw? [And an artiste no less!]

Seriously, though. What's the probable cause to detain this guy? He's carrying some weapons and a chainsaw that may or may not have blood on it. And yet they did detain him - for two hours. (I didn't get detained for two hours the last time I crossed the border - how about you?) But they simply didn't have a reason to keep him.

If anyone can posit a reason based upon either state or federal law for detaining someone under these circumstances, I'm open to the argument. But based upon the AP story, I just don't see it.

Anthony said Despres was questioned for two hours before he was released. During that time, he said, customs agents employed "every conceivable method" to check for warrants or see if Despres had broken any laws in trying to re-enter the country.

"Nobody asked us to detain him," Anthony said. "Being bizarre is not a reason to keep somebody out of this country or lock them up. ... We are governed by laws and regulations, and he did not violate any regulations."

Anthony conceded it "sounds stupid" that a man wielding what appeared to be a bloody chain saw could not be detained. But he added: "Our people don't have a crime lab up there. They can't look at a chain saw and decide if it's blood or rust or red paint."

That sounds about right to me. And respectfully, I don't see how this is an indictment of homeland security. After all - there was no reason to detain him at the border, but they did take away his weapons. Then, when Canadian authorities did finally get around to putting out an alert of this guy, American authorities were able to find him within hours. To my way of thinking, the system worked as it should in this case.

There's an interesting story in the Columbus Dispatch today about a Russian kid who came to the United States in September 2001 at age 15, spoke no English, but later became a Marine.

Alexey Gvenetadze had never seen someone as tough as that Marine guarding the U.S. Embassy in Moscow.

The 14-year-old’s mother had married an American she’d never seen until just before the wedding. Mother and son were standing in line for visas to the United States. Alexey didn’t want to leave his friends. But then he saw that Marine.

"He freezed when he saw him," said his mother, now Elena Kumbrasova Burnett. "He said, ‘Can I go and look at him one more time?’ "

She was ready to marry a stranger, to leave her family and friends in Nizhny Novgorod. She wasn’t counting on her son’s wanting to join the Marines.

She had married, in part, to get Alexey out of Russia and away from mandatory military service. For years, she’d gone to doctors, telling them he’d wet the bed, hoping for some medical excuse she could give to the government.

"I just want peace in my life," Elena said.

But he’d seen that Marine. And as it turned out, he wouldn’t find his real place in the United States until he became one himself.

The story goes on to explain how Alexey's mother met her father - not quite a mail order bride, they met through mutual friends who had used a Russian-American dating service.

Elena and Alexey, by then calling himself Alex, arrived in the United States at the end of September that year, just after the terrorist attack. The attack would eventually lead to a war in Iraq, where Marines would go to fight.

At 15 years old, Alex started at Westerville South. He didn’t even know the English alphabet. He learned it, but not happily.

"He seemed very lonely," said Carole Dardamanis, who teaches English-as-a-second-language classes at Westerville South. She was Alex’s favorite.

"I remember talking to his mother and saying something was missing. He just seemed so solemn."

Alex stayed that way for two years. Then, one day when he was a senior, he met a Marine recruiter at school. He remembered what that Marine at the embassy had looked like. His entire personality changed.

He walked and talked differently. He started working out so he could pass the physical requirements. He asked Dardamanis to tutor him for the military entrance test.

"He had such purpose," the teacher said. "He had found his place in his new culture. . . . He was an all-American kid."

Elena didn’t like it, but she wasn’t worried. He wouldn’t be able to pass the English test, she thought. But he did. Then she thought he couldn’t pass the physical test, but he did that, too.

"I told him, ‘You don’t have to fight for America. It’s your adopted country,’ " she said. "Look at all these happy people around with jobs and girlfriends who aren’t fighting."

He answered, "Maybe if we weren’t in Iraq, they wouldn’t be so happy."

That's cool. It took this kid just three years in America to realize that some things are worth fighting for. Why have so many others who have lived here all their lives still not had the same realization?

(Here's the link - but you have to be a subscriber.)

Care to know where your favorite justice came down on SPECTOR V. NORWEGIAN CRUISE LINE LTD. (03-1388)?

Good luck.

Kennedy, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II-A-1, and II-B-2, in which Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, JJ., joined, an opinion with respect to Parts II-A-2, II-B-1, II-B-3, and III-B, in which Stevens and Souter, JJ., joined, and an opinion with respect to Part III-A, in which Stevens, Souter, and Thomas, JJ., joined. Ginsburg, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which Breyer, J., joined. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in part, dissenting in part, and concurring in the judgment in part. Scalia, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Rehnquist, C. J., and O'Connor, J., joined, and in which Thomas, J., joined with respect to Part I-A.

Anyone else tired of complaining about Islamofascism? It's time for a new cause celebre!

The rumor is that Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes are already engaged. This of course, is an outrage that goes far beyond splashing urine on a Koran.

The last time I so enraged about geopolitical affairs, I wore a t-shirt emblazoned with the slogan "Free Kuwait".

Well, it looks like I have some shopping to do.

No new posts since May 26th? Geez Louise. Tomorrow, I promise.

(I mean today -- later -- after the sun rises.)

Oh, please.

I just love the lede here:

In coordinated broadsides from London and Washington, Amnesty International accused the Bush administration on Wednesday of condoning "atrocious" human rights violations, thereby diminishing its moral authority and setting a global example encouraging abuse by other nations.

Two questions:

A) Since when did Amnesty International think we had any moral authority in the first place?

and

B) How ludicrous is it to suggest that the rest of the world is only now following our lead now we've led them down the abusive path?

Pathetic.

Arrested Development is coming back!!

(Thanks for the pointer, Mis)

Doesn't this:

Remind you of this?

Just like this:

Reminded me of this:

O.k. Not really. Just seeing if you were paying attention.

Chrenkoff has the details.

This is an interesting and thought-provoking article. Apparently, folks in Texas are getting their panties in a bunch (so to speak) because the high school cheerleaders and dance team routines are "too sexy" and their outfits are "too skimpy."

I'd like to chime in on this debate -- I really would. But I have to say that I don't think I can have an informed opinion on the subject until I've seen some video (or at least some pictures) of what they are talking about.

Fainting Goats.

There's selfish. And then there's this.

There's good selfish and there's bad selfish.

Getting cold feet about your wedding, and cancelling it at the last minute, even though you are inconveniencing hundreds of people and dozens of attendants, all of whom have probably already spent a bundle of money on gifts, clothes, travel arrangements, etc., is good selfish. It's good because you should never enter into a marriage that you are not 100% sure about, no matter what the circumstances.

Getting cold feet about your wedding, and disappearing unexpectedly, making it appear as if you'd been abducted, causing panic not only in your family but in your community and sparking a massive manhunt, is bad selfish. It's bad because -- well that's pretty much self explanatory, isn't it?

Pathetic.

Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise?

Speechless.

Though if I were Chris Klein, I'd be strutting around, all "Yea? So she dumped me - so what? When's the last time your fiance dumped you for Tom Cruise?"

And what's the deal with Tom and taller women?

This one doesn't get easier as you go along....

http://www.sheppardsoftware.com/states_experiment_drag-drop_oneState15s_500.html

Thanks again, Jonah.

Earlier today a commercial for “Star Wars” came on, and Gnat was unimpressed. I did my Darth Vader impersonation: no impact. “But he’s evil! He used his michondian concentration for personal gain!”

“It’s just a commercial, daddy. Oh! Look!”

I froze. The Bratz are now Baby Mommaz. Yes, the hooker-in-training dolls have children. Bratz are the main reason I do not keep a supply of bricks around the house, because everytime the commercials come on I wish to pitch something kiln-fired through the screen so hard it beans the toy exec who greenlighted these hootchie toys. The Baby Bratz are as bad as you can imagine: “Bottles with Bling.” Judas on a stick, why not just refit the Bratz so they have Real Oozing Gonorreal Flow Action?

“They know how to flaunt it, and they’re keeping it real in the crib.”

What exactly is the penalty for failing to keep it real in the crib? Someone busts a cap in yo Pamper? I know I am old and so out of step it’s a wonder I don’t just appear as an indistinct smear, but was it really necessary to push the Age of Sultry Hussyism down to the infant stage? And who, exactly, are the Babyz flaunting it for? Are we going to see a commercial with Elmo in sunglasses, sitting with his legs sprawled, spanking some pliant Babyz with one hand while gumming down some mashed crack?

Amen.

How did you do? Let me know in the comments.

http://www.sheppardsoftware.com/states_experiment_drag-drop_Intermed_State15s_500.html

Hat tip: Jonah.

Headline: Nick Lachey staying close to Jessica Simpson

Really? Gee - I wonder why that is.

Oh. Yea. That.

* I do not claim ownership or authorship. I got this in an e-mail like everyone else.

* For entertainment purposes only. Gambling is legal in Nevada only. Void where prohibited.

Whether he thinks so or not.

To say that Hitch has a different opinion on JPII would be an impressive understatement.

A taste from the second article:

Without, it seems, quite noticing what they are saying, the partisans of the late pope have been praising him for his many apologies. He apologized to the Jewish people for the Vatican's glacial coldness during the Final Solution, and for historic filiations between the church and anti-Semitism. He apologized to the Eastern Orthodox Christians, and to the Muslims, for the appalling damage done to civilization by papal advocacy of the Crusades, and by forced conversion and massacre in the Balkans during the church's open alliance with fascism during World War II. He apologized to the world of science and reason by admitting that Galileo should not have been condemned by the Inquisition. These are not small climb-downs, and they do not apply just to the past. They are and were admissions that the Roman Catholic Church has been responsible for the retarding of human development on a colossal scale.

Gotta love the British. Protesters at weddings! I love it!

Nearly eight years after Diana’s death, some have bridled at accepting Camilla Parker Bowles as a future queen, seeing her relationship with Charles as the reason his first marriage fell apart.

“She broke up their marriage,” said Yvonne Williams, 67, who raised a banner that read: “Long live the Queen, Diana Forever: King Charles, Queen Camilla — Never.”

I mean seriously - SIXTY SEVEN years old, and she cared enough to line the procession route with a protest sign.

Imagine if that was commonplace. Who would have shown up at your wedding to heckle you?

Sublime, as usual

Almost makes me wish I was Catholic. Almost.

So I just purchased this beast of a grill. So far, all I can tell you is that it looks damn good. Haven't used it yet.

Anywhoo. I was skimming through the user manual for the grill and came across this helpful tip in dealing with propane tanks:

"Never expose a propane cylinder to any heat source...."

Hmmmmm. So I shouldn't expose the propane tank for my BBQ grill to any heat source.....

*raising hand* Uh, excuse me - if you could just clarify something for me......

Admittedly, I don't know much about patent law, though I do seem to remember I did pretty well in my intellectual property class back in law school. Anyway, this article seems to indicate that Smucker's isn't entitled to an extension of their patent for Uncrustables because their design is "obvious."

Really? How long have PB&J's been around? What's that? A really long time? That's what I thought. And yet it wasn't until the new millenium that someone marketed a premade PB&J in which both sides of the sandwich are coated with PB to protect the bread from the J.

And don't even get me started on the genius of cutting off the crusts and sealing the edges.

If it was so damn obvious, how come no one had ever done it before?

...now that Jesse Jackson is on the scene.